[d@DCC] Talk to MPs this summer Re: anti-circumvention! (Was: Re: Registering my opposition to Bill C-47)

From: Russell McOrmond <russell _-at-_ flora.ca>
To: "General Copyright Discussions \(questions, organizing, etc\)" <discuss (at) list.digital-copyright.ca>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 11:03:25 -0400
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703031357470.11348@calcutta.flora.ca> <99a6c38f0706221351l69fff0fen9db1232502e3f329@mail.gmail.com>

Scott Elcomb wrote:
> "OTTAWA, June 22, 2007 -- The Honourable Maxime Bernier, Minister of
> Industry, today proudly announced that Bill C-47, the Olympic and
> Paralympic Marks Act, has received Royal Assent."


   I was going to write about C-59 and how the debates about it in 
Parliament and the Senate are a much more interesting study for how WIPO 
treaty ratification might go (with the push from the Industry and Public 
Safety committees) --- but it seems that many of the parl.gc.ca websites 
are down right now.

> Frustrated,

   We need to talk to MPs, especially any in Industry, Public Safety, 
Justice or Heritage committees.  It is clear that the lobbying from the 
special interests pushing for anti-circumvention legislation is getting 
to the politicians, but our message is not.

   If any of these folks are your MP or the MP in a riding close to you, 
do everything you can to get a meeting with them!

BTW: I wrote the following letter and both printed (and mailed in smail 
mail) and sent an email link to it on Friday.

----

   Dear Mr. James Rajotte, member for Edmonton-Leduc, and current chair 
of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology (INDU),

   Brian Masse, member for Windsor West, and current NDP Industry Critic,

   On May 4, 2004, I was invited to be a witness in front of the 
Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.  The debate was 
on Bill C-2 (An Act to amend the Radiocommunication Act). I was invited 
to speak about the unintended consequences surrounding the excessive 
regulation on the manufacture, import, ownership and use of 
multi-purpose communications technology.  I spoke about how the language 
of the bill has components similar to the 1996 WIPO treaties and the 
massive harm that ratification of these treaties would have to the 
property rights of technology owners, the rights of software authors, 
the rights of users of digital content, and the rights of a majority of 
content creators.

   I had the impression that it was the two of you, as Industry critics 
for the Conservatives and NDP in that Liberal minority government, that 
had me invited.  At the time the Heritage committee seemed unwilling to 
invite people not seen as historical stakeholders in the copyright 
debate, and the two of you observing this wanted to have the views of 
someone from the software and technology community on the record.

   Industry Committee recently had similar hearings where only a tiny 
subset of relevant stakeholders were invited.   The results of the 
misinformation and half-truths you received was the report the committee 
  recently tabled titled "Counterfeiting and Piracy are theft".

   I explain in an article titled "Jefferson Debate: A Godwin's law for 
copyright discussions?" why the inappropriate reference to "theft" is 
offensive to many of us involved in this area of public policy, and how 
this language is abused to shut down debate.  I am enclosing a copy of 
this article.

   http://www.digital-copyright.ca/Jefferson_Debate

   The primary problem with the report (beyond language) is not issues 
around counterfeiting, but things unrelated to counterfeiting that these 
special interest groups tried to lump together. I believe it is 
critically important that we have a conversation about the harm to the 
Canadian economy that will come from so-called "anti-circumvention" laws 
(prohibiting owners removing third party digital locks from the hardware 
we own, or the software that drives the hardware we own), and the 
possible ratification of the 1996 WIPO treaties.

   I realize that parliament is in recess for the summer.  I would like 
to meet with you to discuss this issue. If necessary I can pay some 
amount out of my own pocket for traveling.  Easier for me is if I could 
meet in Ottawa.  Another possibility is to have a voice-only 
conversation (phone, Internet) at your convenience.

My contact information is as follows:

[contact info removed -- see http://flora.ca#contact ]

-- 
  Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
  Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
  rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
  http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/ict/

  "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
   manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
   portable media player from my cold dead hands!"
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@list.digital-copyright.ca
http://list.digital-copyright.ca/mailman/listinfo/discuss