HomeReturn Home
By: Shaylyn Brown
As the buzz surrounding the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the United States has subsided since the successful protests by Silicon Valley, Canadians are now preparing for a similar battle. Bill C-11 is a copyright bill that is currently being presented in the Canadian House of Commons. The bill is being promoted by many of the same lobby groups that promoted SOPA, so it's understandable that Canadians would worry about it.
Bill C-11 centred around its digital lock provisions. These provisions provide legal security for technical protection found on DVDs, electronic books and other digital content. Many organizations, such as businesses, the Retail Council of Canada, creator groups, consumer groups, education and library associations, as well as representatives of the visually impaired, have argued that the digital lock provisions found in Bill C-11 are overly restrictive and disruptive to the traditional copyright balance. These organizations further note that the
restrictiveness of the government punishes Canadian consumers and businesses – not the pirates.
Several of the lobby groups that support Bill C-11, including the music, movie and entertainment software industry, want language similar to that found in SOPA. One of the major provisions is that the courts will be able to order the blocking of pirate sites like Pirate Bay, as a form of protection for the Canadian marketplace from foreign pirate sites. This demand for courts to be able to order the block on sites is very similar to Section 102 of SOPA, which also wanted to be able to block websites. This means that the courts would have the ability to order blocks upon any website that may contain copyrighted material (though what constitutes a "pirate site" can be a slippery slope).
Another request of these lobby groups is for Bill C-11 to contain similar language to Section 103 of SOPA, which states that sites designed or operated for the purpose of offering goods or services in a manner that engages in, enables, or facilitates infringement, be shut down. This means that websites that allow users to post videos or other media could be shut down due to a copyright infringement by a user. This portion of SOPA raised fears that mainstream websites such as YouTube could be shut down due to users posting copyrighted materials. This is not only a concern for the average Internet user, but also for those who use the Internet to help their business. Many companies use YouTube videos as a means for advertising their services, and many artists use it as a means for advertising their music or movies.
The music industry lobbyists are seen as major supporters of Bill C-11. However, few groups have actually made demands for an increase in the changes to the proposed bill. When the industry lobbyists appeared before a House of Commons committee for reviewing the bill, one Member of Parliament commented that their demands were “substantial and anything but minor.” Though it has been said by the lobbyists that websites like YouTube are not the intended targets of the requested changes to Bill C-11, the ongoing dispute between Google (the owner of YouTube) and Viacom in the U.S. shows how the provision could easily be misused. The misuse of the provision could also create problems for the investment and technology community in Canada – and during a recession we really should be wary of something that may reduce jobs.
Along with the SOPA-style reforms that are being requested, the music industry is also seeking injunction powers to remove content from websites. It also wants Internet providers to implement policies on alleged copyright infringers that could lead to termination of their Internet service. The ability for an Internet provider to terminate Internet service for an alleged copyright infringement would interfere with a Canadian's right to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. If Internet service could be cut off due to an alleged copyright infringement, the person whose service would be cut off would be viewed as guilty of the infringement without the due process to which all Canadians are entitled.
With all these negative issues, there is no reason why legislation like Bill C-11 should be passed through the Canadian House of Commons and turned into a law. Last week, Government House Leader Peter Van Loan suggested that the government has hopes to pass Bill C-11 within the next two months. This suggests that our government is not able to learn from the mistakes of our neighbouring country, and that, with little consideration of public opinion, it is determined to blindly pass a bill that affects all Canadians. Thus, just as was done in the United States, the public must take an interest and make itself heard by a government that has a finger in each ear and is humming to the sound of self-interest.
Article Source:
