A creator and consumer's view of copyright reform in Canada.
As a content creator and a content consumer I can tell you that unless the digital locks provision is changed to allow backups, change formats and break copyright protection so you can use the content on other devices the bill is useless to everyone except copyright lawyers, and the people hiring copyright lawyers; here's why.
In case you haven't noticed the price on music and videos have been steadily increasing on iTunes. A user I know was telling me that a show they subscribe to on iTunes went from $30 for the season to $45 for the season. They called it a rip off and are now canceling their subscription to the show. In my humble opinion Mr. Freeman thinks the way Mr. James Moore thinks about content and copyright - you pay a licensing fee for every format you want the content on regardless if you can convert it yourself. Should digital copies cost as much as their printed counter parts in the store? Why would you pay $45 for say a digital copy of season 9 of CSI when you can go to the store and buy the same season on DVD for $20 and you get the nice packaging and pressed DVD's. <sarcasm>Makes complete sense!</sarcasm>
The copyright holders don't have their heads on straight. Lets see what's going through their heads. The consumer pays more if we put a digitally locked file on iTunes, they pay as much for it as they would pay for the DVD, but they don't get packaging, artwork or an original copy, they we tell them what devices they have to buy to play our content, and we can take away the right for them to play back their digital content.
This changes everything. Please allow me to clarify; this is right out of the proposed law. So I need to put things into perspective here. This is the proposed law's definition of "Circumvent"
“circumvent” means,
(a) in respect of a technological protection measure within the meaning of paragraph (a) of the definition “technological protection measure”, to descramble a scrambled work or decrypt an encrypted work or to otherwise avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate or impair the technological protection measure, unless it is done with the authority of the copyright owner; and
(b) in respect of a technological protection measure within the meaning of paragraph (b) of the definition “technological protection measure”, to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate or impair the technological protection measure.
“technological protection measure”
« mesure technique de protection »
“technological protection measure” means any effective technology, device or component that, in the ordinary course of its operation,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now here is what a person is NOT allowed to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Prohibition
41.1 (1) No person shall
(a) circumvent a technological protection measure within the meaning of paragraph (a) of the definition “technological protection measure” in section 41;
(b) offer services to the public or provide services if
(i) the services are offered or provided primarily for the purposes of circumventing a technological protection measure,
(ii) the uses or purposes of those services are not commercially significant other than when they are offered or provided for the purposes of circumventing a technological protection measure, or
(iii) the person markets those services as being for the purposes of circumventing a technological protection measure or acts in concert with another person in order to market those services as being for those purposes; or
(c) manufacture, import, distribute, offer for sale or rental or provide — including by selling or renting — any technology, device or component if
(i) the technology, device or component is designed or produced primarily for the purposes of circumventing a technological protection measure,
(ii) the uses or purposes of the technology, device or component are not commercially significant other than when it is used for the purposes of circumventing a technolog- ical protection measure, or
(iii) the person markets the technology, device or component as being for the purposes of circumventing a technological protection measure or acts in concert with another person in order to market the technology, device or component as being for those purposes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can read the full bill here or an excellent summary on Michael Geist Website.
The only way around this is the creators of the content have to come out with software that will either convert your content to different devices because under Bill C-32 it is illegal for you to do so or to seek services or any software, to put your digital copy of Toy Story Three on your New Android Tablet. That's right the digital copies provided only work in iTunes, Windows Media Player, Apple and Microsoft devices. They will not work on your PSP, Android, or other devices. This also makes ripping DVD's illegal because it has a digital lock called CSS, it was just broken a long time ago by DVD Jon.
I'm of the belief that you should only have to pay for content once and if you want to take the time to change the content from platform to platform all the power to you; and if the media companies and copyright holders want to provide that content at what consumers consider a "reasonable" price even better. In my opinion a digital copy should be 1/3 of the price of the "hard" copy since there is no shipping for the digital copy no box, no store, no sales person to sell it to me, the cost just aren't their with the digital copy that their are with disks at the store.
The other part of C-32 I wanted to comment on is the "Educational" use of copyrighted material. In my opinion, the Creator's Copyright Coalition is essentially fear mongering that they are all going to starve if a teacher don't get fair use rights in the classroom. This is ridiculous; teachers loving being able to give students books and if possible I know for a fact most teachers would rather buy 30 copies of a book then photocopy a few pages. The educational exemptions are just going to more or less legalize what is going on in schools now, like watching a movie about World War II with out having to pay a licensing fee, or copying a few pages out of a book to analyze the meaning of a phrase poem etc.
Bill C-32 has some great things in it but the digital locks issue must be addressed and changed to allow for the circumvention of DRM for personal or educational uses. Once that change is made, the bill should be allowed to pass. If a member of the Copyright Committee is reading this please feel free to add the following text to C-32 in the copyright infringement section.
41.15 to allow for the circumvention of media by use of service and software for personal, non commercial and educational uses of owned content.
42. Fair Use and Moral Rights - media shall not be restricted to or prohibit the user from not being able consume purchased media on media consumption devices. The user shall be allowed to change the format of media for devices that the user owns at the time of purchase and in the future.
That seems fair to me. I have a huge library of DVD's and we recently purchased a blu-ray player for our HD TV, this doesn't mean I'm entitled to a new blu-ray movie because I have the DVD but I am entitled to rip my DVD's to my computer for backup or to watch them on my Linux media server. If I want to re-purchase the movies I own to a higher quality format or purchase a digital copy because I don't have to convert the movie myself (because it's more convenient) that's my choice. I should not be dictated to by media companies, manufactures and government that I have to re-buy everything to pay for some executive's diamond studded solid gold TV or ivory back scratcher.
If you think I'm harsh about this don't even ask me what I think about the book publishers and their copyright issues with digital books.
Trevor
