Digital Copyright Canada

  It seems that Jack Kapica has a BLOG
http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20041102.gtkapicablog/BNStory/Technology/

   "one thing is certain: We are going to get a revised copyright law 
    sooner or later, and it will likely come down in favour of the
    copyright holders.  As it should."

  As a fellow creator and copyright holder, I believe this is dead wrong.  

  Copyright is not about protecting existing copyright holders, but about
protecting creativity including a potential future generation of creators.  
To do so copyright *MUST* be limited in scope and time, and allow for a
vibrant, growing and clear public domain.  Otherwise you will have one
generation of creators and then creativity stops as we can no longer
"stand on the shoulder of giants".

  I suspect you know this, but there is no evidence that the MPs on the
important committees adequately understand this!  It is an important roll
of journalists to educate policy makers and the public, but unfortunately
too many writers have been singing in the same choir as the media
monopolists.  This is even after free-lancers are threatened with some of
the excessive might they helped grant to these monopolists.
  PWAC Condemns New CanWest Global Contract
  http://www.digital-copyright.ca/discuss/3969

  There are a number of interesting ideas in your note about copyright,
including that WIPO ratification means the end of the Private Copying
levy.  Unless there is an about-face by parliament, ratification will mean
an even larger trade deficit with the USA in intangibles as Canadian
levies head south, something the Heritage committee refuses to recognize.  
They want WIPO ratification and to keep the levy.

  I believe you misinterpreted the the P2P music distribution lawsuits.  
They lost not because of a lack of WIPO treaty ratification, but a lack of
evidence of uploading and the fact that the *RECORDING AND MUSIC*
industries asked for the Private Copying regime which made downloading
legal.  The recording industry was never the victims, and do not need a
change in copyright law to win cases against illegal file sharing: they
just need to spend a few minutes to collect some evidence of uploading and
to prove they are the copyright holders of what they claim is infringing.

  The big label recording industry is just abusing the misinterpretations
of this case to convince policy makers to change copyright in their favor,
and in ways that will generally harm creativity (not to mention their
competitors).  What is good for the recording industry is not necessarily
good for the music industry: they are competitors, as can be seen with the
Ringtone levy debates.  What is good for the recording and music
industries is not necessarily good for Canadian creativity.

  In the end, isn't copyright supposed to be about encouraging creativity,
not about filling the bank accounts of the members of incumbent industrial
associations?

-- 
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> 
 Code is Law: how software code regulates the activities of citizens,
 and acts similar to law.  How do we ensure transparency/accountability?  
 http://www.flora.ca/russell/drafts/life-of-hacker.html#code=law
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@list.digital-copyright.ca
http://list.digital-copyright.ca/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Digital Copyright Canada

Re: [d@DCC] Globe update: Hurry up and ratify WIPO

All Canadian Citizens are "Rights Holders"!