Amendments to copyright law could cost universities

A Canadian University Press article by Nadya Bell, Ottawa Bureau Chief (Published in e.Peek, The Manitoban Online) includes:

Conservative industry critic MP James Rajotte said his party believes an educational exemption is necessary.

“Most information that is put up for public consumption should be considered in the public domain,” said Rajotte.

NDP Charlie Angus agreed. The heritage critic said he is concerned that the government will try to rush through the bill.

“I am deeply concerned about a fast track approach on government bills that would basically put toll booths all across the information highway,” said Angus.

I wrote the following as feedback to this article.

I'm the webmaster for While I Am Not A Lawyer (IANAL), this is an area of law and policy that I've spent a lot of time on.

The article includes a common misconception, which is that the issue that the government mis-labeled "Educational use of the Internet" is included in Bill C-60. This issue has been carved out, and isn't yet included in Bill C-60 -- and will likely result in an entirely separate bill.

Bill C-60 is very harmful to everyone from independent (most) authors, all audiences, and most intermediaries such as educational and library communities. It is only beneficial to the very few special interests it was written for (incumbent recording industry, motion picture industry, and "software manufacturing" industry monopolies/cartels). In the case of recording and motion picture industries they are too technically illiterate to realize that what they are asking for will actually harm them in the long term.

See for example:

C-60 already represents a radical change for schools (as well as everyone else)

To understand the mis-labeled "educational use of the Internet" issue, please see:

Exposing the extremists in the Canadian copyright debate

As Apple and Labels feud mounts, labels continue to demonstrate technology illiteracy.