Louis-Philippe Verenka (Papineau, Green Party of Canada)


In order:

Do you agree that Copyright should be primarily handled by Industry rather than Heritage, and would you be willing to offer a similar pledge to the above listing Industry rather than Heritage?

No, I believe that copyright issues are too important to be delt with by only one ministry. It should be a coalition of Heritage, Industry, Foreign Affairs and any other ministry that could be possibly involved with such issues. Giving all the power to one department is too much danger.

Would you support a bill to modernize Canadian law to provide legal protection *from* technical measures used to circumvent computer security, circumvent privacy, circumvent competition, as well as other important public policy?

Yes, privacy is too important to let it go. I wasn't aware that this kind of technology was present in commercial software.

An article appeared in the Toronto Star on January 2 that relates to the first question. Please read "Rootkit fiasco shows sterner laws needed" by Michael Geist http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/1643 and let me know if you support legal protection from abuses of technical measures.

This is clearly an intrusion in people's life. Trying to conduct business risk-free is impossible and some level of protection should be required, but none that causes harm. Sony's technicians should have been aware of the problems their technology would cause. They probably were, anyway... Yes, definitely, protection from abuse is surely a good idea for technical measures.

Are you aware that so-called "copy protection" will always fail at its claimed purpose?

Yes, but I disagree with the idea of banning any form of protection. Most artists out there are not multimillionaires, you know, and thrive to succeed. Yes, it will always be overriden by something new, but some people deliberately steal other people's work and that is not correct behaviour.

Are you aware that the interests of creators and the interests of intermediaries such as recording labels (CRIA), "software manufacturing" industry associations (CAAST) are not only not the same, but quite often incompatible.

Yes, just like governments don't represent populations anymore.

Terms such as "theft" and "property" are often used to stifle debate, and to narrow peoples understanding of cultural, content and innovation industries.

Yes, and once more, I'm not talking of cash-gushing artists who are well-established and don't even write songs nor music. Picture yourself as writing a poem, a book, a software program, or a song. That creation is your property, so as long as you're willing to share it with others there should be no problem to live out of it. These issues are never going to be clear-cut in such an individualist society.

Are you aware of how intangibles like creativity and innovation are entirely different from tangibles, even though both have value and both can be bought and sold?

Absolutely! And why not, if there's no abuse and you share your creation with others? If there's offer and demand, a price tag should be put, as long as it's not abusive!

Are you aware of the full spectrum of methods of creation, distribution and funding of creativity and innovation? Are you aware of Peer Production techniques, Free/Libre and Open Source Software, and Creative Commons?

I learned about Peer Production techniques, Free and Open Source Softwares, but never about Creative Commons. I think these are really interesting. The key issue with software is that BIll Gates created an immense demand and an unnatural monopoly, just like big labels with big artists. In that case, cheap alternative arise (like paying less to download an album, or copying Windows for some people) like OpenSource software, which will in the long run, if supported properly by the government, allow for more choice.

But keep in mind that buying is voting. If you willingly pay 15$ for a CD, you're implicitely agreeing with the principle of private property over ideas and creations. Abuse arises when creatures like Windows get used by everyone because the seller puts pressure on all the supply-chain (and offers Windows-equiped computers to libraries so that people get accomodated to his system) and cleverly captures all the market. Or a big label that monopolizes an artist people want to hear and charges way too much for a CD. An equilibrium must be reached and maintained somewhere, don't you think? That issue will most likely be resolved in the short run.

I learned a lot by reading your articles as I wasn't much aware of the copyright issue. Keep informing your MPs and candidates this way and you'll change things. Farewell in your crusade!

Hope it answers your questions. Regards,

Louis-Philippe Verenka
Candidat dans Papineau - Parti Vert du Canada