Vancouver Sun: Wednesday, January 16, 2008
To appreciate how out of date Canada's copyright laws are, consider that taping a TV show on a VCR for later viewing is a copyright infringement that could potentially lead to lawsuits.
A VCR, in case you're too young to remember, is a device with which people could record a TV show in the olden days before the introduction of technology that allows people to download a program from the Internet (or stream it), store it in a compressed file on a computer hard drive and transfer it to multiple platforms for viewing, uploading and manipulating.
Canada's archaic and restrictive laws are stifling technological innovation and preventing companies from offering to consumers all the services the latest gadgets are capable of delivering.
The good news is that a revised copyright law is expected to be tabled in the House of Commons any day now. The bad news is that many fear it will make matters even worse. Indeed, a chorus of concern delayed its debut in December with 40,000 people joining a group on Facebook to oppose the legislation.
They are right to be worried. Entertainment lobby groups in the United States and the Canadian Recording Industry Association here at home hope to increase the control that content creators have over their works and the compensation they receive for it. They want to be able to limit what people do with their cellphones, iPods and other devices to protect their constituents' intellectual property rights. They want Parliament to make it illegal to download songs from the Internet or share them without paying a fee, to time shift TV programs using a digital video recorder or copy files to DVDs or MP3 players.
Clearly, content creators deserve to be sufficiently rewarded for their work to make their endeavour worthwhile. At the same time, consumers have the right to enjoy the full capabilities of the equipment they've purchased, free from restrictions on what they can record and the use they make of content once it has been legitimately obtained.
A revised copyright law must strive to find a balance between the rights of creators and "fair use" by consumers.
The protest against the proposed copyright reform was intended, in part, to persuade the Conservative government not to follow the U.S. model. The U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Copyright Term Extension Act favour producers with copyright protection for life, plus 95 years for individual works and up to 120 years for corporate creations, and make it illegal to tamper with a digital lock (or other Digital Rights Management technology) meant to prevent consumers from using material in ways the rights holder doesn't want, such as copying from a CD or viewing a DVD outside a designated jurisdiction. Critics contend that these laws have a chilling effect on innovation.
Indeed, Telus says it can't launch a new service that would enable subscribers to record shows on a network server for later viewing without the need for a personal video recording device until Canada's copyright laws are updated.
Even as they fight downloading and file-copying, content creators earn revenue from these activities. Canadians pay levies on blank writable media with proceeds going to creators and performers. This compensation is in addition to royalties and other income sources.
Canadians also faced the prospect of levies on iPods and MP3 players but the Federal Court of Appeal has overturned the Copyright Board's decision last summer to allow them.
There is no easy answer to the problem of meeting the competing demands of content creators and consumers. But as legislators ponder this difficult and complex issue, they should keep in mind the bigger picture of technological innovation. New copyright laws should not suppress creativity. Technological advances have given everyone, especially children, the tools to make art, movies and music in ways we could not have imagined even a decade ago. Copyright reform should encourage, not restrict, the use of these tools.
Barriers erected to block the use of technology will be defeated by that technology. Rather than trying to lock up content, creators should focus on inventive pricing and marketing initiatives rather than threatening to take "copyright infringers" to court. Convince us it's worth paying for.
Copyright reform should open up new possibilities for maximizing enjoyment of cultural products and free the technology that has given them life. It should not bind them in a legislative straitjacket.
