Elections Canada Electoral district profile (Links to Map, Past Candidates, and Past Election Results)

Member of Parliament for Parry Sound-Muskoka / Parry Sound - Muskoka

Name: Hon. Tony Clement
e-Mail: <Clement.T@parl.gc.ca>
Party: Conservative Party of Canada

When I first heard a group outside of the Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) or Creative Commons movement use the word "CopyLeft", I thought they were simply using the term incorrectly. (See: Independent authors just wanting a little respect... from fellow creators and collective societies from 2006)

In the FLOSS movement it means something similar to ShareAlike with Creative Commons: the license says the copyrighted work can be freely shared (without additional permission/payment) as long as any derivatives are equally shared. The licensing model is not opposed to copyright in any way, and focuses on material rewards in the form of additional creative works rather than royalties.

I continue to hear the term "copy left" used, sometimes by those who consider it a positive term, but more often by people who are trying to use the term in a derogatory manner. In this context the term is not being used to reference to a licensing model, but a political philosophy.

This suggests that the term "copy left" references a liberal creators' rights philosophy, and the "copy right" refers to a conservative creators' rights philosophy. It is only a coincidence that those on the "copy left" also support CopyLeft style licensing.

(Including full article here -- configuration issue at IT World Canada. Read full article on IT World Canada's blog >> )

Denver Gingerich asked Tony Clement some questions, and received a reply from Erik Waddell, Director of Communications, Office of the Honourable Tony Clement. I believe the reply to be incorrect. In it Erik references the WIPO treaty definition of TPMs, something which was included in C-60 but not in C-61 or C-32. Bill C-32 contains the USA DMCA's definition of technical measures.

A message from Industry Minister Tony Clement (@TonyClement_MP on Twitter) has indicated that there will be no C-32 special committee struck until the fall. (parl.gc.ca says, "The House of Commons is adjourned until Monday, September 20, 2010")

This should not be taken as meaning we should all take the summer off, but that we have time to ensure that all 308 MPs have an idea of why Copyright is so controversial, and that is not about "creators on one hand, and consumers on the other". My experience over the last near decade is that the debate is largely between different creators, since many of the proposals put forward by some are aimed at their competitors and not infringers.

The new bill is now on the order paper. Like Bill C-61, and unlike previous Liberal bills, it will be tabled by the Minister of Industry rather than the Minister of Heritage.

The Prime Minister announced changes to the federal ministers. (CBC) The important thing for us is that the Ministers of Industry, Heritage are the same.

The Minister of International Trade is now Peter Van Loan, while the Minister of Foreign Affairs remains with Lawrence Cannon. It can be argued that these ministers, and not Industry or Heritage, actually have the primary responsibility for Copyright law given Copyright is primarily set in trade and treaty negotiations.

A Globe and Mail article discusses how federal Industry Minister Tony Clement has claimed that a temporary non-binding deal granting Canada's independent garages access to the proprietary software and tools to fix newer-model cars is sufficient to protect the right to repair. He is claiming that that Private Members bill C-273, the Right to Repair bill, is no longer necessary, suggesting that "intellectual property rights" need to be balanced against the rights of automobile owners. Sorry, but unless the automobile owner is manufacturing and distributing new automobiles, there are no legitimate "intellectual property rights" at question.

For a party that alleges to hold protecting property rights as a founding principle, they don't seem to be interested in protecting this right.

MPs with positions relevant to copyright revision

This page is an attempt to identify the most relevant MPs from the perspective of copyright reform. If you are a constituent for one of these MPs, you can help ensure that they are well-educated on the issues.

Note: Page only updated for the Ministers. Parliamentary secretaries, and issue critics have not been named yet. The unknowns are marked as (U), listing the previous person holding the position.

The new cabinet is being sworn in, and I'm updating our page for important MPs. Copyright being joint between Industry and Heritage, the two Ministers who will be responsible are The Honourable Tony Clement (Minister of Industry) and The Honourable James Moore
(Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages).

The list of candidates supporting the Copyright Pledge has been updated on Monday the 6'th.

If your candidates aren't on this list, then ask them if they would take the pledge.

Addition: Hijal De Sarkar (NDP, Ottawa South)