Re: [Cdn-DMCA] Towards a presentation in Ottawa April 11'th.

From: mskala _-at-_ ansuz.sooke.bc.ca
To: No DMCA in Canada <canada-dmca-opponents (at) flora.org>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 22:04:23 -0500 (EST)

On Sat, 9 Mar 2002, Russell McOrmond wrote:
>   I am setting up a meeting with someone from Canadian Heritage in Ottawa,
> towards my being involved in making a small presentation in Ottawa.  We do
> have April 11 to look forward to.

I have friends who are planning to attend the Vancouver one, which is next
(on March 15); with a little luck we'll get some information from that as
to what to expect.  I sent in my own registration on the 3rd; haven't
heard anything back.  I said that I could attend the Toronto or Ottawa
meetings, in that order of preference, and would attend both if space
allowed.

>   It would be nice to get ideas from the other presentations to know what
> we are up against, or what level of support we have received so far.  I

Well, the URL for the registration information got posted on Slashdot's
"slashback" feature a few days ago, so I think we can expect a lot of
people to have seen that.  Unfortunately, I expect that most people who
found out about it that way will be operating on the same level as those
who sent in the EFC form letter - they'll be operating on the assumption
that the government wants to implement the DMCA here, and they won't have
anything to say about it except "don't".  That's not the most constructive
position because I think it's clear that the government doesn't *want* to
implement the DMCA here; we should be supporting them in that, with
specific arguments, instead of just hitting them with a knee-jerk "don't
follow the U.S. lead, you idiots!".  I really hope that people who have
been following the process carefully won't have their voices drowned out
by well-meaning but poorly-informed anti-DMCA protestors.

I'm not sure I'm in the best position to join your presentation because
I'm approaching this from a very different direction (as an academic and
individual instead of a business person), but for whatever it's worth,
here are the points that I consider important with some supporting notes:

1. Freedom of expression.  It's guaranteed in the Constitution,
intellectual property *is not*, and it has to take precedence over all the
other legal forces at work here.  In particular: if the WIPO treaties
conflict with freedom of expression, the treaties have to give first; and
on your point of competition versus copyright law, I agree with you that
competition law takes precedence, but freedom of expression overrides
either of them.

2. DRM technology: cannot be protected if that conflicts with freedom of
expression (see above); also, protecting DRM would be undesirable even if
we legally could do it.  Some reasons it shouldn't be protected:  DRM
supports monopolies (which ties into your points about competition law);
DRM interferes with values like access for the disabled; DRM interferes
with creation of new content because creation of new content requires fair
dealing; the "brain drain" away from any countries where DRM is protected.

3. Notice and takedown - bad because it allows plaintiffs in copyright
cases to write their own temporary restraining orders, violating due
process.  A point I recently discovered which I think could be very
powerful is this:  Bill C-15A, the new criminal law reform bill which is
currently at the Senate committee stage, almost law, creates a "notice and
notice" system for removing child pornography.  The police file a
complaint to the ISP, the ISP notifies the poster, the poster has a chance
to show cause to a court, and then the court issues an order, and all that
has to happen *before* child pornography can legally be forced to be
removed from the Net.  The "notice and takedown" procedure for copyright
infringement would allow plaintiffs to force takedown before it goes
through a court... so, proponents of notice and takedown are claiming that
copyright infringement is such a bad thing that it requires stricter
enforcement measures than those Parliament was willing to implement with
respect to child pornography.  A call for notice and takedown on copyright
infringement is a claim that copyright infringement is worse than child
pornography!  Properly framed, I think that could really hurt the "notice
and takedown" proponents.

-- 
Matthew Skala
mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca                    Embrace and defend.
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/

--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.flora.org/dmca/