What does it mean to be "Pro-IP" ?

William Patry's blog is a great read. He spent 25 years as a copyright lawyer in the US (6 of those representing copyright holders), and also worked at the US Copyright Office.

This posting (Via Archive.org) is a great complement to Russell's "copyright as water" analogy.

Most of the post is focussed on a specific US Bill, but the start is very applicable to Canada. Here's an excerpt :

The question is not whether copyright is a good thing: properly calibrated copyright is very good, indeed essential for certain classes of works. Sir Hugh and I are both pro-IP in this most important of senses. But an excessive amount of something that is beneficial in measured doses can become fatal in overdoses, and copyright is already at fatal strength. Yet, when they are not alienating their customers, copyright industries spend the rest of their time in efforts to obtain new, powerful, undeserved, and unnecessary remedies. Content owners act as if obtaining more and more and more will save them: it won’t, quite the reverse: it only continues an unfortunate trend of making copyright law and content owners among the most despised elements in society. While proponents of such efforts describe themselves as being pro-IP, they have the opposite effect by bringing disrespect on the entire system. I call that being anti-IP, not pro-IP.