Digital Copyright Canada

In an article for The Mark I suggest that we shouldn't blame Google when music blogs are shut down, since it’s the major record labels that are to blame.

Leave it to the FSF to initiate the only coverage of the iPad that sees it as I see it. (See: The Register)

I received an email from the Defective by Design campaign that started:

"Today, Apple launched a computer that will never belong to its owner. Apple will use Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) to gain total veto power over the applications you use and the media you can view."

They then reference a petition. Not sure how useful a petition to Mr. Jobs that questions his entire business ethic could be, but it does make for a useful educational tool. If you are a Canadian and agree that the owners of technology should be the ones who hold the keys, and not a third party, then sign our Petition to protect Information Technology property rights which is tabled in parliament and can actually have influence.

By now you will have read many articles derived from the statements made by David Drummond, SVP, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer at Google about China.

The primary issue that Google was bringing up was a simple and not politically hot one. Companies need to know that the government of countries they are trying to do business in will have laws and enforce them against those who attack the physical or virtual infrastructure of these businesses.

Many of the comments and articles about this incident suggested Google was trying to protect online free speech. I do not buy that argument in this case.

Read full article on IT World Canada's blog ...

Earlier this week I listened to (MP3) an interview of Margaret Atwood by Spartan Youth Radio reporter Madeline Lemire. I found I agreed with some of the views of Ms. Atwood. This surprised me because I was aware of some of her views on Copyright, and because of this I had become wilfully ignorant of her work. I did not want to financially support someone I felt was a political opponent.

Read full article on IT World Canada's blog >>

I normally don't follow the Consumer Electronics Show, but this year is different. The way in which it is different for me is also part of the story of the show.

I've been watching coverage of the show via the live stream from This Week in Tech. As well as this, I have Rhythmbox (an Audio/Video tool that supports RSS) automatically downloading both the MP3 audio and the Video downloads for their TWiT Live @CES.

Full article on IT World Canada's blog >>>

An Ars Technica article by Nate Anderson includes:

As part of a comprehensive bilateral trade deal it's working out right now with Canada, the EU has asked for a host of intellectual property changes: Canada will need to extend its copyright terms by another two decades, will need to ban the circumvention of DRM, will need to adopt a "making available right," and must implement a "new resale" right giving creators a cut of the money every time their work is resold in the future.

Just an important reminder for those Canadian and European activists who mistakenly believe that the backward-facing pressure on Copyright all comes from the USA.

A blog article by Matthew Skala references the fact that Lulu is now promoting DRM. (See also SlashDot, and my comment there)

In the comments I offered the following:

I don't think you are over-reacting by thinking of pulling your books from Lulu, and looking elsewhere. The main reason I promoted Lulu myself in the past is because I thought it would be a publisher that would have rejected DRM given it was founded by Bob Young. This to me suggests the company has lost its way, and is no longer relevant as it can be lumped in with all the other outgoing publishers.

EFF commentary by Gwen Hinze discusses the counterfeit treaty ACTA.

The Internet provisions have nothing to do with addressing counterfeit products, but are all about imposing a set of copyright industry demands on the global Internet, including obligations on ISPs to adopt Three Strikes Internet disconnection policies, and a global expansion of DMCA-style TPM laws.

DMCA-style TPM laws are a direct attack on property rights, and 3-strikes laws are invalid given we already have statutory damages which is "one *PROVEN* strike" laws. 3-strikes is all about punishment without proof, where the punishment doesn't fit the crime (cutting off legs for jaywalking).

Fred von Lohmann posted a review of Bill Patry's book.

If you're looking for a basic primer on digital copyright, or the DMCA, or DRM, this isn't the book for you (instead, try these). Rather, Patry's contribution is to focus on the importance of metaphors and rhetoric in the policy debates (past and present) surrounding copyright.

The book has a blog.

For us Canadians, here is the Chapters/Indigo reference.

This afternoon I sent in my submission to the consultation. Today is September 11'th, and Sunday September 13'th is the last day make your voice heard in the 2009 copyright consultation.

There are so many more things I would like to say on copyright, but at 8 pages I felt it was already pretty long. I have given several presentations lasting an hour for what amounts to a single clause in the 1996 WIPO treaties. The format of this consultation doesn’t allow us the ability to discuss at this level of detail, but only very broadly. While this series of blog posts about the 2009 consultation is primarily motivated to encourage people to participate in the consultation, it also allowed me to say more things that would have been reasonable to include in my written submission.

>> Read full article on IT World Canada's blog.