Victoria Times Colonist: 2008 June 28
Jack Knox
Last day of school for Victoria students today. Last day of class for Bob Warren, too. After 32 years teaching at George Jay Elementary, he's pulling the plug.
You might recall Warren from earlier columns on the annual Read For The Top test-your-knowledge-of-Canadian-kid-lit tournament that he founded 25 years ago.
It was a mock Read For The Top match that greeted Warren when he wandered into the George Jay gym after school this week. Two teams of colleagues, current and former, staged a game of Bob-related trivia. (Question: "Bob Warren has taught at George Jay for how many years?" Answer: "100!")
He was feted by all manner of friends after that. Children's author Eric Wilson, on hand with wife Flo, told him: "Of all the schools that I've been to across the country, George Jay is number one when it comes to promoting literacy, and that's due to you." Retired colleague Bob Gretsinger performed Sentimental Journey in four-part harmony all by himself, playing two recorders with his nostrils before adding a third, in his mouth, for the finale. There's something you don't see every day. Thank heavens.
Warren began his teaching career in 1971 in Port Edward, near Prince Rupert, where he grew up. It wasn't his first career choice -- he had wanted to be a Mountie -- but was still something he had long felt like pursuing. Not that he had been a spectacular scholar himself; he says he was an average student, albeit one whose mischievous sense of humour might have earned him the occasional request to stay in school after the bell had rung. He's still a joker, is the one who recently presented a dieting colleague with a chocolate box full of carrot sticks.
Gerald Ford was president when Warren first walked into George Jay in 1976. Bobby Orr was MVP of the Canada Cup. There were way more kids then; what at one point was the biggest elementary school in B.C., with an enrolment of 1,200, today has just 260 students in kindergarten through Grade 5. It is classified as an inner-city school, though it defies the label. Spend a couple of hours in George Jay, you'll come out feeling better about the world.
Perhaps today's students are a little more distracted by electronics, but they have not, in essence, changed over the past 32 years, Warren says. "Kids are kids."
His advice for new teachers? "Be prepared to put yourself into it. If you're passionate about it, you'll do even better." Don't go into teaching if all you're thinking about are the generous holidays.
Bob can now devote more time to the farm that he and wife Anne Warren, also a teacher, have on West Saanich Road. Ducks, chickens, cows, as well as vegetables and flowers. One of the cows had twins on Father's Day. They joke that Bob used to carry pictures of his children and grandchildren, but now he shows pictures of the calves. Sometimes school classes would visit the farm, and sometimes the farm would visit the school: The occasional pig showed up to be kissed by the occasional staff member. Olympic triathlon champion Simon Whitfield ended up living on the farm off and on when, after coming to Victoria to train, he ended up volunteering at George Jay. "He's like one of the family," says Bob.
The high points of Warren's career? Writing a book marking the school's 90th anniversary in 1999 was one. Another was when Janine Roy, then at the helm of George Jay, was named one of Canada's top school principals in 2006.
The low point? "I honestly don't think there were any low points."
Warren, the vice-principal and teacher-librarian, isn't the only educator to hang it up, of course. Across B.C., the number of retiring teachers has climbed each year since 2000. The turnover rate won't slow anytime soon, according to the B.C. Teachers Federation.
That's particularly true around here: More than 40 per cent of teachers in each of the three Victoria-area districts are 50 years of age or older. The average retirement age for a B.C. teacher is 59. In 2006 the BCTF estimated that B.C. would lose 10,000 teachers over five years.
That's a lot of Bob Warrens going out the door. They all -- or at least those who put as much into teaching as Bob did -- will be missed.
jknox@tc.canwest.com
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Mesa (AZ) School Board Votes to Eliminate School Librarians
By Debra Lau Whelan -- School Library Journal, 6/25/2008 2:05:00 PM
Despite last-ditch efforts by library supporters, the Mesa Public School Board in Arizona voted this week to eliminate all teacher librarians over a three-year period.
As a result, one-third of the schools in Mesa will not have media specialists in the 2008–2009 school year. This includes Westwood High School, which has an International Baccalaureate program that involves students completing a difficult senior thesis that typically involves working with the school librarian, says Ann Dutton Ewbank, a librarian at Arizona State University and the key organizer of the Fund Our Future Arizona movement to save the district’s media specialists.
“We will be monitoring Mesa Public Schools next year closely, and will continue to advocate for teacher librarian funding at the state level,” says Dutton Ewbank, who modeled her “save our school libraries” campaign after the Spokane Moms, three devoted mothers who worked tirelessly to obtain state funding for school librarians—and succeeded earlier this year by convincing legislators to allocate $4 million in library funds for the 2008–2009 academic year.
Just last month, Mesa school library supporters thought there was still hope because the district’s governing board—which initiated the proposal to eliminate all media specialists over the next three years—said it was open to other suggestions.
Arizona doesn’t have dedicated funds for school libraries or mandate-certified media specialists at any grade. School libraries and librarians are controlled at the district level, not by the state Department of Education, which means that when funds are scarce, librarians are typically the first on the chopping block, says Dutton Ewbank, adding that state funding would have ensured a “dedicated funding stream” for school librarians.
Mesa Public Schools hopes to cut $1.2 million of its total $20 million budget deficit by axing the school librarians.
Despite last-ditch efforts by library supporters, the Mesa Public School Board in Arizona voted this week to eliminate all teacher librarians over a three-year period.
As a result, one-third of the schools in Mesa will not have media specialists in the 2008–2009 school year. This includes Westwood High School, which has an International Baccalaureate program that involves students completing a difficult senior thesis that typically involves working with the school librarian, says Ann Dutton Ewbank, a librarian at Arizona State University and the key organizer of the Fund Our Future Arizona movement to save the district’s media specialists.
“We will be monitoring Mesa Public Schools next year closely, and will continue to advocate for teacher librarian funding at the state level,” says Dutton Ewbank, who modeled her “save our school libraries” campaign after the Spokane Moms, three devoted mothers who worked tirelessly to obtain state funding for school librarians—and succeeded earlier this year by convincing legislators to allocate $4 million in library funds for the 2008–2009 academic year.
Just last month, Mesa school library supporters thought there was still hope because the district’s governing board—which initiated the proposal to eliminate all media specialists over the next three years—said it was open to other suggestions.
Arizona doesn’t have dedicated funds for school libraries or mandate-certified media specialists at any grade. School libraries and librarians are controlled at the district level, not by the state Department of Education, which means that when funds are scarce, librarians are typically the first on the chopping block, says Dutton Ewbank, adding that state funding would have ensured a “dedicated funding stream” for school librarians.
Mesa Public Schools hopes to cut $1.2 million of its total $20 million budget deficit by axing the school librarians.
Professional days make for better informed teachers
Vancouver Sun Letter: 2008 June 25
In her June 24 letter, Cherryl Katnich said that if teachers are concerned about the lack of learning time in schools, perhaps there should be fewer professional days.
She is probably not aware that the teachers' professional association requested that the government add extra days to the school year so teachers could attend workshops that would enhance teaching practice.
If professional days were no longer taken, then it would stand to reason that the school year would be shortened by the same number of days.
This doesn't seem like a very good outcome for the students, who benefit from their teachers being up to date on the latest research in their areas of education.
As a primary teacher and teacher-librarian in the Surrey school district, I have attended hundreds of events, most of which I paid for myself, as funding for professional development is very limited.
Helen Fielding, Vancouver
In her June 24 letter, Cherryl Katnich said that if teachers are concerned about the lack of learning time in schools, perhaps there should be fewer professional days.
She is probably not aware that the teachers' professional association requested that the government add extra days to the school year so teachers could attend workshops that would enhance teaching practice.
If professional days were no longer taken, then it would stand to reason that the school year would be shortened by the same number of days.
This doesn't seem like a very good outcome for the students, who benefit from their teachers being up to date on the latest research in their areas of education.
As a primary teacher and teacher-librarian in the Surrey school district, I have attended hundreds of events, most of which I paid for myself, as funding for professional development is very limited.
Helen Fielding, Vancouver
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
ASCLA introduces guide for libraries purchasing electronic resources
ALA: 2008 June 24
CHICAGO - The Association of Specialized and Cooperative Library Agencies, a division of the American Library Association (ALA), is announcingd the release of “Think Accessible Before You Buy,” which provides guidelines to ensure that the Web and software resources libraries purchase is accessible to all.
“As information providers, we know that information is only useful if someone can find it and is able read it,” stated Barbara Mates, ASCLA president. “With innovations in the area of electronic information and search tools, we’re able to find it but we are not there yet on the ‘reading’ part. We must all commit to assuring that information can be read by all patrons, including those using adaptive technologies.”
“The biggest challenge for Web accessibility is raising awareness that guidelines do exist that offer electronic information providers the methods and opportunity to create universally accessible information,” said William Reed, chair of the committee that developed the toolkit and assistant head of the Cleveland Public Library’s Library for the Blind & Physically Handicapped.
While national accessibility standards do exist, they can be difficult to understand for those without a technical background. This toolkit builds on those standards, such as Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative, and makes them easier to understand, with examples and definitions. Easy-to-use checklists are provided to make purchasing decisions simpler, and a glossary helps explain the terminology behind accessibility.
“Think Accessible Before You Buy” is available on the ASCLA web site at http://ala.org/ala/ascla/asclaprotools/thinkaccessible/.
CHICAGO - The Association of Specialized and Cooperative Library Agencies, a division of the American Library Association (ALA), is announcingd the release of “Think Accessible Before You Buy,” which provides guidelines to ensure that the Web and software resources libraries purchase is accessible to all.
“As information providers, we know that information is only useful if someone can find it and is able read it,” stated Barbara Mates, ASCLA president. “With innovations in the area of electronic information and search tools, we’re able to find it but we are not there yet on the ‘reading’ part. We must all commit to assuring that information can be read by all patrons, including those using adaptive technologies.”
“The biggest challenge for Web accessibility is raising awareness that guidelines do exist that offer electronic information providers the methods and opportunity to create universally accessible information,” said William Reed, chair of the committee that developed the toolkit and assistant head of the Cleveland Public Library’s Library for the Blind & Physically Handicapped.
While national accessibility standards do exist, they can be difficult to understand for those without a technical background. This toolkit builds on those standards, such as Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative, and makes them easier to understand, with examples and definitions. Easy-to-use checklists are provided to make purchasing decisions simpler, and a glossary helps explain the terminology behind accessibility.
“Think Accessible Before You Buy” is available on the ASCLA web site at http://ala.org/ala/ascla/asclaprotools/thinkaccessible/.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
ALA honors Newbery, Caldecott winners at Annual Conference
ALA: 2008 June 19
CHICAGO — The Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC), a division of the American Library Association (ALA), will honor the winners of the Newbery and Caldecott medals for outstanding writing and illustration in children’s literature from 6-11 p.m. on Sunday, June 29, in the Anaheim Hilton, Pacific Ballroom, at the gala Newbery-Caldecott Banquet to be attended by nearly 1,100 librarians, reviewers, publishers and fans of children’s literature. The event is part of the ALA Annual Conference in Anaheim, June 26 – July 2.
Author Laura Amy Schlitz, winner of the John Newbery Medal for outstanding writing for “Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! Voices from a Medieval Village,” and illustrator Brian Selznick, winner of Randolph Caldecott Medal for outstanding illustration for “The Invention of Hugo Cabret,” will receive their medals and deliver their acceptance speeches during the Banquet. The Newbery and Caldecott honor book recipients will receive certificates.
Each year, ALSC announces the Newbery and Caldecott medal and honor books, the most prestigious awards in children's literature, as part of the Youth Media Awards press conference at the ALA Midwinter Meeting. The medals honor outstanding writing and illustration of works published in the United States during the previous year. The honor books chosen are also truly distinguished titles.
Schlitz is a professional storyteller, playwright, novelist and a librarian at the Park School in Baltimore. In “Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! Voices from a Medieval Village,” published by Candlewick, she brings 13th-century England to life with 21 dramatic narratives.
Selznick, who splits time between Brooklyn and San Diego, received the Caldecott medal for “The Invention of Hugo Cabret,” published by Scholastic Press, an imprint of Scholastic. The book tells the story of Hugo, a young orphan secretly living in the walls of a train station, where he works on completing a mysterious invention left by his father. The tale’s black-and-white pencil illustrations, beginning with the image of the full moon setting over an awakening Paris in 1931, evoke the flickering images of silent films.
The Newbery honor book recipients receiving certificates at the Banquet include: Christopher Paul Curtis, author of “Elijah of Buxton,” published by Scholastic Press, an imprint of Scholastic; Gary D. Schmidt, author of “The Wednesday Wars,” published by Clarion; and Jacqueline Woodson, author of “Feathers,” published by G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
The Caldecott honor book recipients receiving certificates at the Banquet are: Kadir Nelson, illustrator of “Henry’s Freedom Box: A True Story from the Underground Railroad,” written by Ellen Levine and published by Scholastic Press, an imprint of Scholastic; Laura Vaccaro Seeger, illustrator and author of “First the Egg,” published by Roaring Brook/Neal Porter; Peter Sís, illustrator and author of “The Wall: Growing Up Behind the Iron Curtain,” published by Farrar, Straus and Giroux/Frances Foster; and Mo Willems, illustrator and author of “Knuffle Bunny Too: A Case of Mistaken Identity,” published by Hyperion.
Tickets are $89 and will be available at the onsite registration counter until the event is sold out, or noon Friday, whichever occurs first. Doors open at 6:45 p.m., and cocktails (cash bar) will be available prior to dinner at 6 p.m.. Tickets will not be sold at the door, but those without tickets will be admitted at no charge following the meal service, in order to hear the speeches. A receiving line following the Banquet offers an opportunity to meet the winners in person.
The American Library Association (ALA), the oldest and largest library association in the world, holds its Annual Conference each June. The largest such convention in the world is attended by more than 18,000 librarians, educators, writers, publishers, Friends of Libraries, trustees and special guests. The conference includes more than 2,300 meetings, discussion groups, and programs on various topics affecting libraries and librarians as well as tours and special events. Topics include libraries and technology, censorship and literacy.
CHICAGO — The Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC), a division of the American Library Association (ALA), will honor the winners of the Newbery and Caldecott medals for outstanding writing and illustration in children’s literature from 6-11 p.m. on Sunday, June 29, in the Anaheim Hilton, Pacific Ballroom, at the gala Newbery-Caldecott Banquet to be attended by nearly 1,100 librarians, reviewers, publishers and fans of children’s literature. The event is part of the ALA Annual Conference in Anaheim, June 26 – July 2.
Author Laura Amy Schlitz, winner of the John Newbery Medal for outstanding writing for “Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! Voices from a Medieval Village,” and illustrator Brian Selznick, winner of Randolph Caldecott Medal for outstanding illustration for “The Invention of Hugo Cabret,” will receive their medals and deliver their acceptance speeches during the Banquet. The Newbery and Caldecott honor book recipients will receive certificates.
Each year, ALSC announces the Newbery and Caldecott medal and honor books, the most prestigious awards in children's literature, as part of the Youth Media Awards press conference at the ALA Midwinter Meeting. The medals honor outstanding writing and illustration of works published in the United States during the previous year. The honor books chosen are also truly distinguished titles.
Schlitz is a professional storyteller, playwright, novelist and a librarian at the Park School in Baltimore. In “Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! Voices from a Medieval Village,” published by Candlewick, she brings 13th-century England to life with 21 dramatic narratives.
Selznick, who splits time between Brooklyn and San Diego, received the Caldecott medal for “The Invention of Hugo Cabret,” published by Scholastic Press, an imprint of Scholastic. The book tells the story of Hugo, a young orphan secretly living in the walls of a train station, where he works on completing a mysterious invention left by his father. The tale’s black-and-white pencil illustrations, beginning with the image of the full moon setting over an awakening Paris in 1931, evoke the flickering images of silent films.
The Newbery honor book recipients receiving certificates at the Banquet include: Christopher Paul Curtis, author of “Elijah of Buxton,” published by Scholastic Press, an imprint of Scholastic; Gary D. Schmidt, author of “The Wednesday Wars,” published by Clarion; and Jacqueline Woodson, author of “Feathers,” published by G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
The Caldecott honor book recipients receiving certificates at the Banquet are: Kadir Nelson, illustrator of “Henry’s Freedom Box: A True Story from the Underground Railroad,” written by Ellen Levine and published by Scholastic Press, an imprint of Scholastic; Laura Vaccaro Seeger, illustrator and author of “First the Egg,” published by Roaring Brook/Neal Porter; Peter Sís, illustrator and author of “The Wall: Growing Up Behind the Iron Curtain,” published by Farrar, Straus and Giroux/Frances Foster; and Mo Willems, illustrator and author of “Knuffle Bunny Too: A Case of Mistaken Identity,” published by Hyperion.
Tickets are $89 and will be available at the onsite registration counter until the event is sold out, or noon Friday, whichever occurs first. Doors open at 6:45 p.m., and cocktails (cash bar) will be available prior to dinner at 6 p.m.. Tickets will not be sold at the door, but those without tickets will be admitted at no charge following the meal service, in order to hear the speeches. A receiving line following the Banquet offers an opportunity to meet the winners in person.
The American Library Association (ALA), the oldest and largest library association in the world, holds its Annual Conference each June. The largest such convention in the world is attended by more than 18,000 librarians, educators, writers, publishers, Friends of Libraries, trustees and special guests. The conference includes more than 2,300 meetings, discussion groups, and programs on various topics affecting libraries and librarians as well as tours and special events. Topics include libraries and technology, censorship and literacy.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
‘Win-win’ Copyright Act still has plenty of losers
Vancouver Sun Editorial: 2008 June 18
When the federal industry minister introduces amendments to the Copyright Act by telling people that the government has no intention of enforcing them, you know there's a serious problem.
Yet that's precisely what Industry Minister Jim Prentice did upon introducing Bill C-61. Evidently aware of the considerable backlash the bill would receive, Prentice said it would be up to industry to bring actions against consumers who violate the proposed law's draconian provisions.
And make no mistake about it, the amendments are draconian. While Prentice attempted to sell them as a balance between the rights of content creators and consumers, it's clear that consumers -- and in many cases, creators -- can only lose should the new regime become law.
First, let's look at how the proposed law is being sold.
The government has emphasized that "time-shifting" provisions will allow consumers to record television programs to watch later, and that provisions pertaining to music copying will permit them to copy songs onto their iPods.
Sounds good, until you realize that these freedoms are largely illusory: The amendments also include "anti-circumvention" provisions which forbid consumers from picking digital locks, which are often included on CDs and DVDs.
Hence there's a good chance copying music to an iPod will be illegal, for example, despite the feds' assurance of consumer freedom.
There are, in fact, many wholly legitimate reasons for picking digital locks, just one example being that the consumer may want to stop privacy-invading technology. So the anti-circumvention provisions contain a privacy exception, but that, too, is illusory, since the law bans the software necessary to pick the lock.
Similarly, people with visual or hearing impairments are also free to break locks, but anyone helping them would be guilty of an offence, so their chances of making use of the exception are slim to none.
What about the use of copyrighted material for educational purposes? Once again things look good, provided you don't look too closely.
For example, libraries can make digital copies for customers, as long as the copies will self-destruct, Mission Impossible-style, within five days.
The law therefore takes away everything it gives consumers, and more. And while some members of industry are happy with the bill, many others, including the Canadian Music Creators Coalition, stand opposed because the bill resorts to the failed American method of forcing creators to sue their fans, rather than helping "musicians get paid."
The fact that the bill relies on the American method is not just a coincidence, either, as it is almost entirely the result of the intense pressure U.S. authorities placed on Ottawa. In contrast, there was precious little public consultation during drafting of the proposed law.
Prentice claims that the bill is a "win-win," though it's not entirely clear who will win.
What is clear is that if the bill becomes law, all consumers, and many content creators, are destined to lose.
When the federal industry minister introduces amendments to the Copyright Act by telling people that the government has no intention of enforcing them, you know there's a serious problem.
Yet that's precisely what Industry Minister Jim Prentice did upon introducing Bill C-61. Evidently aware of the considerable backlash the bill would receive, Prentice said it would be up to industry to bring actions against consumers who violate the proposed law's draconian provisions.
And make no mistake about it, the amendments are draconian. While Prentice attempted to sell them as a balance between the rights of content creators and consumers, it's clear that consumers -- and in many cases, creators -- can only lose should the new regime become law.
First, let's look at how the proposed law is being sold.
The government has emphasized that "time-shifting" provisions will allow consumers to record television programs to watch later, and that provisions pertaining to music copying will permit them to copy songs onto their iPods.
Sounds good, until you realize that these freedoms are largely illusory: The amendments also include "anti-circumvention" provisions which forbid consumers from picking digital locks, which are often included on CDs and DVDs.
Hence there's a good chance copying music to an iPod will be illegal, for example, despite the feds' assurance of consumer freedom.
There are, in fact, many wholly legitimate reasons for picking digital locks, just one example being that the consumer may want to stop privacy-invading technology. So the anti-circumvention provisions contain a privacy exception, but that, too, is illusory, since the law bans the software necessary to pick the lock.
Similarly, people with visual or hearing impairments are also free to break locks, but anyone helping them would be guilty of an offence, so their chances of making use of the exception are slim to none.
What about the use of copyrighted material for educational purposes? Once again things look good, provided you don't look too closely.
For example, libraries can make digital copies for customers, as long as the copies will self-destruct, Mission Impossible-style, within five days.
The law therefore takes away everything it gives consumers, and more. And while some members of industry are happy with the bill, many others, including the Canadian Music Creators Coalition, stand opposed because the bill resorts to the failed American method of forcing creators to sue their fans, rather than helping "musicians get paid."
The fact that the bill relies on the American method is not just a coincidence, either, as it is almost entirely the result of the intense pressure U.S. authorities placed on Ottawa. In contrast, there was precious little public consultation during drafting of the proposed law.
Prentice claims that the bill is a "win-win," though it's not entirely clear who will win.
What is clear is that if the bill becomes law, all consumers, and many content creators, are destined to lose.
‘Win-win’ Copyright Act still has plenty of losers
Vancouver Sun Editorial: 2008 June 18
When the federal industry minister introduces amendments to the Copyright Act by telling people that the government has no intention of enforcing them, you know there's a serious problem.
Yet that's precisely what Industry Minister Jim Prentice did upon introducing Bill C-61. Evidently aware of the considerable backlash the bill would receive, Prentice said it would be up to industry to bring actions against consumers who violate the proposed law's draconian provisions.
And make no mistake about it, the amendments are draconian. While Prentice attempted to sell them as a balance between the rights of content creators and consumers, it's clear that consumers -- and in many cases, creators -- can only lose should the new regime become law.
First, let's look at how the proposed law is being sold.
The government has emphasized that "time-shifting" provisions will allow consumers to record television programs to watch later, and that provisions pertaining to music copying will permit them to copy songs onto their iPods.
Sounds good, until you realize that these freedoms are largely illusory: The amendments also include "anti-circumvention" provisions which forbid consumers from picking digital locks, which are often included on CDs and DVDs.
Hence there's a good chance copying music to an iPod will be illegal, for example, despite the feds' assurance of consumer freedom.
There are, in fact, many wholly legitimate reasons for picking digital locks, just one example being that the consumer may want to stop privacy-invading technology. So the anti-circumvention provisions contain a privacy exception, but that, too, is illusory, since the law bans the software necessary to pick the lock.
Similarly, people with visual or hearing impairments are also free to break locks, but anyone helping them would be guilty of an offence, so their chances of making use of the exception are slim to none.
What about the use of copyrighted material for educational purposes? Once again things look good, provided you don't look too closely.
For example, libraries can make digital copies for customers, as long as the copies will self-destruct, Mission Impossible-style, within five days.
The law therefore takes away everything it gives consumers, and more. And while some members of industry are happy with the bill, many others, including the Canadian Music Creators Coalition, stand opposed because the bill resorts to the failed American method of forcing creators to sue their fans, rather than helping "musicians get paid."
The fact that the bill relies on the American method is not just a coincidence, either, as it is almost entirely the result of the intense pressure U.S. authorities placed on Ottawa. In contrast, there was precious little public consultation during drafting of the proposed law.
Prentice claims that the bill is a "win-win," though it's not entirely clear who will win.
What is clear is that if the bill becomes law, all consumers, and many content creators, are destined to lose.
When the federal industry minister introduces amendments to the Copyright Act by telling people that the government has no intention of enforcing them, you know there's a serious problem.
Yet that's precisely what Industry Minister Jim Prentice did upon introducing Bill C-61. Evidently aware of the considerable backlash the bill would receive, Prentice said it would be up to industry to bring actions against consumers who violate the proposed law's draconian provisions.
And make no mistake about it, the amendments are draconian. While Prentice attempted to sell them as a balance between the rights of content creators and consumers, it's clear that consumers -- and in many cases, creators -- can only lose should the new regime become law.
First, let's look at how the proposed law is being sold.
The government has emphasized that "time-shifting" provisions will allow consumers to record television programs to watch later, and that provisions pertaining to music copying will permit them to copy songs onto their iPods.
Sounds good, until you realize that these freedoms are largely illusory: The amendments also include "anti-circumvention" provisions which forbid consumers from picking digital locks, which are often included on CDs and DVDs.
Hence there's a good chance copying music to an iPod will be illegal, for example, despite the feds' assurance of consumer freedom.
There are, in fact, many wholly legitimate reasons for picking digital locks, just one example being that the consumer may want to stop privacy-invading technology. So the anti-circumvention provisions contain a privacy exception, but that, too, is illusory, since the law bans the software necessary to pick the lock.
Similarly, people with visual or hearing impairments are also free to break locks, but anyone helping them would be guilty of an offence, so their chances of making use of the exception are slim to none.
What about the use of copyrighted material for educational purposes? Once again things look good, provided you don't look too closely.
For example, libraries can make digital copies for customers, as long as the copies will self-destruct, Mission Impossible-style, within five days.
The law therefore takes away everything it gives consumers, and more. And while some members of industry are happy with the bill, many others, including the Canadian Music Creators Coalition, stand opposed because the bill resorts to the failed American method of forcing creators to sue their fans, rather than helping "musicians get paid."
The fact that the bill relies on the American method is not just a coincidence, either, as it is almost entirely the result of the intense pressure U.S. authorities placed on Ottawa. In contrast, there was precious little public consultation during drafting of the proposed law.
Prentice claims that the bill is a "win-win," though it's not entirely clear who will win.
What is clear is that if the bill becomes law, all consumers, and many content creators, are destined to lose.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Conference Materials Wiki available
ALA: 2008 June 17
CHICAGO - The American Library Association (ALA) is collecting materials presented at this year’s Annual Conference in Anaheim, Calif., and making them easier to find online.
You will be able to access all materials provided by presenters from the conference, which runs from June 25 to July 2, via the new Conference Materials Wiki at http://presentations.ala.org/. All collateral conference material will be linked from this wiki, which already includes links to last year's materials and similar content from ALA's units.
“We’re really excited at the response we’ve gotten from presenters and program planners,” said ALA Executive Director Keith Michael Fiels. “The new wiki means that the attendees, as well as the many ALA members who can’t attend, will now have the ability to access materials on hundreds of exciting and stimulating conference programs.”
Program presenters are invited to post their materials (slides, handouts, bibliographies, etc.) to the Wiki prior to conference. This will ensure attendees immediate access, as well as a valuable opportunity to share their knowledge and insights.
Presenters are also encouraged to include a note to "view or download more information at http://presentations.ala.org/." Those who wish to retain their materials on another site are encouraged to publish links to that content on the Conference Materials Wiki, which is pre-loaded with program titles (taken from the final AC 2008 program book listings).
Speakers at conference will benefit from the site by gaining a venue for uploading handouts or publishing links to materials that reside on other sites. Uploading material also requires fewer printouts and helps the environment.
Attendees will benefit from having instant access to material, while those who cannot attend the conference can be assured of having a place to find conference material, not only this year, but also in the future. Users will also be able to find content from future ALA conferences at this one convenient web address.
CHICAGO - The American Library Association (ALA) is collecting materials presented at this year’s Annual Conference in Anaheim, Calif., and making them easier to find online.
You will be able to access all materials provided by presenters from the conference, which runs from June 25 to July 2, via the new Conference Materials Wiki at http://presentations.ala.org/. All collateral conference material will be linked from this wiki, which already includes links to last year's materials and similar content from ALA's units.
“We’re really excited at the response we’ve gotten from presenters and program planners,” said ALA Executive Director Keith Michael Fiels. “The new wiki means that the attendees, as well as the many ALA members who can’t attend, will now have the ability to access materials on hundreds of exciting and stimulating conference programs.”
Program presenters are invited to post their materials (slides, handouts, bibliographies, etc.) to the Wiki prior to conference. This will ensure attendees immediate access, as well as a valuable opportunity to share their knowledge and insights.
Presenters are also encouraged to include a note to "view or download more information at http://presentations.ala.org/." Those who wish to retain their materials on another site are encouraged to publish links to that content on the Conference Materials Wiki, which is pre-loaded with program titles (taken from the final AC 2008 program book listings).
Speakers at conference will benefit from the site by gaining a venue for uploading handouts or publishing links to materials that reside on other sites. Uploading material also requires fewer printouts and helps the environment.
Attendees will benefit from having instant access to material, while those who cannot attend the conference can be assured of having a place to find conference material, not only this year, but also in the future. Users will also be able to find content from future ALA conferences at this one convenient web address.
Uncle Sam's fingers are all over the Canadian copyright bill
Michael Geist
Vancouver Sun
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Last week's introduction of new federal copyright legislation ignited a firestorm with thousands of Canadians expressing genuine shock at provisions that some MPs argued would create a "police state." As opposition to the copyright bill mounts, the most commonly asked question is "Why"?
Why, given the obvious public concern with the bill stretching back to last year, did federal Industry Minister Jim Prentice plow ahead with rules that confirm many of the public's worst fears? Why did a minority government introduce a bill that appears likely to generate strong opposition from both the Liberals and NDP with limited political gain? Why did senior ministers refuse to even meet with many creator and consumer groups who have unsurprisingly voiced disappointment with the bill?
While Prentice has responded by citing the need to update Canada's copyright law in order to comply with the World Intellectual Property Organization's Internet treaties, the reality may be that those treaties have little to do with Bill C-61.
Instead, the bill, dubbed by critics as the Canadian Digital Millennium Copyright Act (after the U.S. version of the law), is the result of an intense public and private campaign waged by the U.S. government to pressure Canada into following its much-criticized digital copyright model. The U.S. pressure has intensified in recent years, particularly since there is a growing international trend toward greater copyright flexibility, with countries such as Japan, New Zealand, and Israel either implementing or considering more flexible copyright standards.
The public campaign was obvious. U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins was outspoken on the copyright issue, characterizing Canadian copyright law as the weakest in the G7 (despite the World Economic Forum ranking it ahead of the U.S.).
The U.S. Trade Representatives Office (USTR) made Canada a fixture on its Special 301 Watch list, an annual compilation of countries that the U.S. believes have sub-standard intellectual property laws. The full list contains nearly 50 countries accounting for 4.4 billion people, or approximately 70 per cent of the world's population.
Most prominently, last year U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein and John Cornyn, along with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, escalated the rhetoric on Canadian movie piracy, leading to legislative reform that took just three weeks to complete.
The private campaign was even more important. Emboldened by the successful campaign for anti-camcording legislation, U.S. officials upped the ante at the Security and Prosperity Partnership meeting in Montebello, Que., last summer. Canadian officials arrived ready to talk about a series of economic concerns, but were quickly rebuffed by their U.S. counterparts, who indicated that progress on other issues would depend upon action on the copyright file.
Those demands were echoed earlier by the USTR, which, according to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, made veiled threats about "thickening the border" between Canada and the U.S. if Ottawa refused to put copyright reform on the legislative agenda.
Faced with unrelenting U.S. pressure, the newly installed industry minister was presented with a mandate letter that required a copyright bill that would meet U.S. approval. The government promised copyright reform in the October 2007 Speech from the Throne, and was set to follow through last December, only to pull back at the last hour in the face of mounting public concern. (Disclosure: I created the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that has more than 60,000 members and played a role in this public opposition.)
In the months that followed, Prentice's next attempt to bring the copyright bill forward was stalled by internal Cabinet concerns over how the bill would play out in public. The bill was then repackaged to include new consumer-focused provisions, such as the legalization of recording television shows and the new peer-to-peer download $500 damage award.
The heart of the bill, however, remained largely unchanged since satisfying U.S. pressure remained priority number one. Just after 11 a.m. last Thursday, the U.S. got its Canadian copyright bill.
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law.
He can be reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.
Vancouver Sun
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Last week's introduction of new federal copyright legislation ignited a firestorm with thousands of Canadians expressing genuine shock at provisions that some MPs argued would create a "police state." As opposition to the copyright bill mounts, the most commonly asked question is "Why"?
Why, given the obvious public concern with the bill stretching back to last year, did federal Industry Minister Jim Prentice plow ahead with rules that confirm many of the public's worst fears? Why did a minority government introduce a bill that appears likely to generate strong opposition from both the Liberals and NDP with limited political gain? Why did senior ministers refuse to even meet with many creator and consumer groups who have unsurprisingly voiced disappointment with the bill?
While Prentice has responded by citing the need to update Canada's copyright law in order to comply with the World Intellectual Property Organization's Internet treaties, the reality may be that those treaties have little to do with Bill C-61.
Instead, the bill, dubbed by critics as the Canadian Digital Millennium Copyright Act (after the U.S. version of the law), is the result of an intense public and private campaign waged by the U.S. government to pressure Canada into following its much-criticized digital copyright model. The U.S. pressure has intensified in recent years, particularly since there is a growing international trend toward greater copyright flexibility, with countries such as Japan, New Zealand, and Israel either implementing or considering more flexible copyright standards.
The public campaign was obvious. U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins was outspoken on the copyright issue, characterizing Canadian copyright law as the weakest in the G7 (despite the World Economic Forum ranking it ahead of the U.S.).
The U.S. Trade Representatives Office (USTR) made Canada a fixture on its Special 301 Watch list, an annual compilation of countries that the U.S. believes have sub-standard intellectual property laws. The full list contains nearly 50 countries accounting for 4.4 billion people, or approximately 70 per cent of the world's population.
Most prominently, last year U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein and John Cornyn, along with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, escalated the rhetoric on Canadian movie piracy, leading to legislative reform that took just three weeks to complete.
The private campaign was even more important. Emboldened by the successful campaign for anti-camcording legislation, U.S. officials upped the ante at the Security and Prosperity Partnership meeting in Montebello, Que., last summer. Canadian officials arrived ready to talk about a series of economic concerns, but were quickly rebuffed by their U.S. counterparts, who indicated that progress on other issues would depend upon action on the copyright file.
Those demands were echoed earlier by the USTR, which, according to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, made veiled threats about "thickening the border" between Canada and the U.S. if Ottawa refused to put copyright reform on the legislative agenda.
Faced with unrelenting U.S. pressure, the newly installed industry minister was presented with a mandate letter that required a copyright bill that would meet U.S. approval. The government promised copyright reform in the October 2007 Speech from the Throne, and was set to follow through last December, only to pull back at the last hour in the face of mounting public concern. (Disclosure: I created the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that has more than 60,000 members and played a role in this public opposition.)
In the months that followed, Prentice's next attempt to bring the copyright bill forward was stalled by internal Cabinet concerns over how the bill would play out in public. The bill was then repackaged to include new consumer-focused provisions, such as the legalization of recording television shows and the new peer-to-peer download $500 damage award.
The heart of the bill, however, remained largely unchanged since satisfying U.S. pressure remained priority number one. Just after 11 a.m. last Thursday, the U.S. got its Canadian copyright bill.
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law.
He can be reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Florida School District Bans Avi Book
By Debra Lau Whelan -- School Library Journal, 6/16/2008 10:20:00 AM
The Fighting Ground (Lippincott, 1984) by Newbery Award-winning author Avi was banned last week from all elementary library shelves at Florida’s Bay District Schools in Panama City.
The school board voted 3-2 to remove the book, despite a review committee’s recommendation that its language wasn’t “lewd,” says Ginger Littleton, a board member who voted against the ban. A parent complained about profanities in the book—about a 13-year-old boy during the Revolutionary War—but Littleton says they were more of an expression of fright by soldiers.
Brenda Toole, the supervisor of instructional media services, says the review committee was disappointed that the book was pulled. But The Fighting Ground may not be gone for long. According to school board policy, the ban will only be in effect until June 30, the official end of the school year.
“I’ve spent 30 years as a teacher and administrator fighting censorship,” says Littleton, who read the book and found it appropriate for its intended fourth-grade reading level. “Our job isn’t to find books that appeal to every child. Our job is to determine if they’re allowable.”
Avi won the 2003 Newbery Medal for Crispin: The Cross of Lead (Hyperion), an action-filled page-turner set in 14th-century England.
Littleton says the district has a history of book challenges because the community is ultra-conservative. “If a child or parent is offended by a book, put it down and read another one," she adds.
The Fighting Ground (Lippincott, 1984) by Newbery Award-winning author Avi was banned last week from all elementary library shelves at Florida’s Bay District Schools in Panama City.
The school board voted 3-2 to remove the book, despite a review committee’s recommendation that its language wasn’t “lewd,” says Ginger Littleton, a board member who voted against the ban. A parent complained about profanities in the book—about a 13-year-old boy during the Revolutionary War—but Littleton says they were more of an expression of fright by soldiers.
Brenda Toole, the supervisor of instructional media services, says the review committee was disappointed that the book was pulled. But The Fighting Ground may not be gone for long. According to school board policy, the ban will only be in effect until June 30, the official end of the school year.
“I’ve spent 30 years as a teacher and administrator fighting censorship,” says Littleton, who read the book and found it appropriate for its intended fourth-grade reading level. “Our job isn’t to find books that appeal to every child. Our job is to determine if they’re allowable.”
Avi won the 2003 Newbery Medal for Crispin: The Cross of Lead (Hyperion), an action-filled page-turner set in 14th-century England.
Littleton says the district has a history of book challenges because the community is ultra-conservative. “If a child or parent is offended by a book, put it down and read another one," she adds.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Where the Wild Things Came From
New York Times: 2008 June 15
Laura Miller
When my second-grade teacher was growing up during the Great Depression, she discovered what would become her favorite book at the Cleveland Heights Public Library. Unfortunately, by the time she’d finished reading “The Hobbit” and persuaded her parents to buy her a copy, they couldn’t find it in the bookstore. Undeterred, she checked out the library’s copy over and over again, determined to make one of her own by pecking out the entire text with two fingers on the family’s manual typewriter. How many authors who write for adults can boast of having a reader so utterly devoted to their work?
Leonard Marcus’s “Minders of Make-Believe: Idealists, Entrepreneurs, and the Shaping of American Children’s Literature” is the story of the apparatus that conjured such readers into existence: the children’s librarian who chose to order “The Hobbit”; the publisher (Houghton Mifflin, Marcus’s own) who brought it to market, the stores that were out of stock (possibly because of paper shortages). He even has a few words for the parents who, in the mid-20th century, increasingly saw books as an investment in their children’s future. What probably strikes many people as the most fascinating aspect of the history of children’s literature in America — the children, and the literature itself — takes a back seat to editors and reviewers, printers and magazines, libraries and bookstores.
Studies of books for young people are a recent phenomenon. “Children’s books,” Marcus writes, “may well have mattered so little to historians of past generations precisely because the books mattered so much to children. With their place firmly fixed in the foreground of young people’s intimate lives, few scholars thought to look further or to ask what the books might possibly mean as commercial or cultural artifacts, much less as works of literature and art.” “Minders of Make-Believe” primarily views them as commodities — ones that went from a trifling sideline to a $3.4 billion industry and have on occasion become the focus of fierce cultural battles.
Marcus orders his account chronologically — from primers to Potter, so to speak — beginning with the first children’s book published in the colonies, “The New-England Primer” (1689) and concluding with J. K. Rowling’s record-breaking series, the only books of any kind to have their release dates celebrated at midnight festivals nationwide. No doubt this structure is meant to emphasize how much children’s book publishing has changed in the past 320 years, but in truth, the industry has been peppered with the same kinds of minor crises that have characterized adult trade publishing over the decades. Budgets are cut in lean years and fattened during booms. Outrage flares when a publisher fires a revered editor in a “spectacular act of administrative shortsightedness” and then the editor is hired a month or so later by someone else. Authors grumble about their contracts. Experts worry about the degradation of the public’s taste and the distractions of other media. And someone is always around to reminisce about how much more noble and idealistic the business was 30 or 40 years ago.
One thing that did distinguish children’s publishing in the early 20th century, however, was the predominance of women in the industry, as editors, critics and librarians. The first editorial division devoted exclusively to children’s books, the Department of Books for Boys and Girls, established by Macmillan in 1919, was headed up by Louise Seaman, a former schoolteacher and graduate of Vassar. Like teaching and missionary work, Marcus notes, working with children’s books was considered one of the “‘mothering’ professions” to which women were supposed to be uniquely suited. Once “Minders of Make-Believe” gets to the period after World War I, it’s taken over by a procession of formidable grandes dames, each armed with “a Seven Sisters degree and the well-honed social skills that implied.” These were among the first women to attain positions of significance in the men’s club of book publishing.
Despite the relative uniformity of their backgrounds, the doyennes of the children’s book world did feud on occasion. One major divide lay between children’s librarians, epitomized by the daunting Anne Carroll Moore, the New York Public Library’s first children’s director, and progressive educators, led by Lucy Sprague Mitchell, who ran the experimental Greenwich Village school now known as Bank Street. The librarians endorsed “timeless” fairy tales and folklore as the gold standard in children’s fiction, while Mitchell and her camp advocated contemporary stories in settings familiar to young readers. “Little Red Riding Hood,” Mitchell protested, was “brutal,” “Cinderella” was “sentimental,” and far too many of the traditional tales were filled with “the strange, the bizarre, the unreal.” Virginia Haviland of the Library of Congress referred to the disagreement as the “controversy raging over ‘milk bottles’ versus ‘Grimm’ for the preschool child.”
In the picture book world, a schism separated the champions of the “book beautiful” from the producers of cheap and cheerful items like the Little Golden Books series, which tended to be sold in five-and-dime stores to the stressed-out parents of whining kids. The quality of the paper, printing and binding in children’s books was a particular obsession for librarians and high-minded booksellers and editors, to the degree that these worthies often seemed to lose track of the books’ intended audience. Marcus writes of an editor at Viking during the inflation-straitened 1970s, who, “in fear and trembling,” was obliged to ask Robert McCloskey if he would permit the reprinting of “Make Way for Ducklings” without a dust jacket. McCloskey consented, though the experience “soured” him. Anyone who’s ever seen a 4-year-old handle a book will wonder why it had a dust jacket to begin with.
Libraries and librarians were perhaps the mightiest force in the children’s book world until the cutbacks of the 1970s and a boom in parental book-buying during the 1980s knocked them from their throne. In their heyday, children’s librarians imperiously banished series fiction (like the Tom Swift and Rover Boys books and, later on, Nancy Drew) from many collections, as well as the Little Golden Books — some of which number among my own childhood favorites. The prejudice against series, the most popular of which were formulaic adventure stories churned out by the Stratemeyer Syndicate, was so virulent that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s autobiographical novels about her pioneer childhood were repeatedly shut out of librarian-administered awards competitions like the Newbery Medal, merely because they seemed series-ish. (Eventually, the American Library Association created a lifetime achievement award in Wilder’s name and presented her with the first one in 1954.)
Although the titans of the genre, from Wilder and Dr. Seuss to E. B. White and Maurice Sendak, make brief appearances in “Minders of Make-Believe,” this is finally a publishing history, the sort of book whose typical event might be characterized as “And then she went to Scribner. ...” Marcus, a charming and nimble writer, makes a valiant effort to keep things interesting, but the editorial shake-ups and new printing technologies will be of interest primarily to historians and people in the industry. It’s the editor’s lot, alas, to subsist on reflected glory. The most interesting thing about even the most esteemed individuals that Marcus covers are the authors they discovered and the books they published, and there’s not quite enough about either in “Minders of Make-Believe.” The effect is a little like hanging around at a perfectly nice party while there’s a terrific one going on just down the hall.
Laura Miller is a staff writer for Salon and the author of “The Magician’s Book: A Skeptic’s Adventures in Narnia,” which will be published in December.
http://tinyurl.com/3g5f32
Laura Miller
When my second-grade teacher was growing up during the Great Depression, she discovered what would become her favorite book at the Cleveland Heights Public Library. Unfortunately, by the time she’d finished reading “The Hobbit” and persuaded her parents to buy her a copy, they couldn’t find it in the bookstore. Undeterred, she checked out the library’s copy over and over again, determined to make one of her own by pecking out the entire text with two fingers on the family’s manual typewriter. How many authors who write for adults can boast of having a reader so utterly devoted to their work?
Leonard Marcus’s “Minders of Make-Believe: Idealists, Entrepreneurs, and the Shaping of American Children’s Literature” is the story of the apparatus that conjured such readers into existence: the children’s librarian who chose to order “The Hobbit”; the publisher (Houghton Mifflin, Marcus’s own) who brought it to market, the stores that were out of stock (possibly because of paper shortages). He even has a few words for the parents who, in the mid-20th century, increasingly saw books as an investment in their children’s future. What probably strikes many people as the most fascinating aspect of the history of children’s literature in America — the children, and the literature itself — takes a back seat to editors and reviewers, printers and magazines, libraries and bookstores.
Studies of books for young people are a recent phenomenon. “Children’s books,” Marcus writes, “may well have mattered so little to historians of past generations precisely because the books mattered so much to children. With their place firmly fixed in the foreground of young people’s intimate lives, few scholars thought to look further or to ask what the books might possibly mean as commercial or cultural artifacts, much less as works of literature and art.” “Minders of Make-Believe” primarily views them as commodities — ones that went from a trifling sideline to a $3.4 billion industry and have on occasion become the focus of fierce cultural battles.
Marcus orders his account chronologically — from primers to Potter, so to speak — beginning with the first children’s book published in the colonies, “The New-England Primer” (1689) and concluding with J. K. Rowling’s record-breaking series, the only books of any kind to have their release dates celebrated at midnight festivals nationwide. No doubt this structure is meant to emphasize how much children’s book publishing has changed in the past 320 years, but in truth, the industry has been peppered with the same kinds of minor crises that have characterized adult trade publishing over the decades. Budgets are cut in lean years and fattened during booms. Outrage flares when a publisher fires a revered editor in a “spectacular act of administrative shortsightedness” and then the editor is hired a month or so later by someone else. Authors grumble about their contracts. Experts worry about the degradation of the public’s taste and the distractions of other media. And someone is always around to reminisce about how much more noble and idealistic the business was 30 or 40 years ago.
One thing that did distinguish children’s publishing in the early 20th century, however, was the predominance of women in the industry, as editors, critics and librarians. The first editorial division devoted exclusively to children’s books, the Department of Books for Boys and Girls, established by Macmillan in 1919, was headed up by Louise Seaman, a former schoolteacher and graduate of Vassar. Like teaching and missionary work, Marcus notes, working with children’s books was considered one of the “‘mothering’ professions” to which women were supposed to be uniquely suited. Once “Minders of Make-Believe” gets to the period after World War I, it’s taken over by a procession of formidable grandes dames, each armed with “a Seven Sisters degree and the well-honed social skills that implied.” These were among the first women to attain positions of significance in the men’s club of book publishing.
Despite the relative uniformity of their backgrounds, the doyennes of the children’s book world did feud on occasion. One major divide lay between children’s librarians, epitomized by the daunting Anne Carroll Moore, the New York Public Library’s first children’s director, and progressive educators, led by Lucy Sprague Mitchell, who ran the experimental Greenwich Village school now known as Bank Street. The librarians endorsed “timeless” fairy tales and folklore as the gold standard in children’s fiction, while Mitchell and her camp advocated contemporary stories in settings familiar to young readers. “Little Red Riding Hood,” Mitchell protested, was “brutal,” “Cinderella” was “sentimental,” and far too many of the traditional tales were filled with “the strange, the bizarre, the unreal.” Virginia Haviland of the Library of Congress referred to the disagreement as the “controversy raging over ‘milk bottles’ versus ‘Grimm’ for the preschool child.”
In the picture book world, a schism separated the champions of the “book beautiful” from the producers of cheap and cheerful items like the Little Golden Books series, which tended to be sold in five-and-dime stores to the stressed-out parents of whining kids. The quality of the paper, printing and binding in children’s books was a particular obsession for librarians and high-minded booksellers and editors, to the degree that these worthies often seemed to lose track of the books’ intended audience. Marcus writes of an editor at Viking during the inflation-straitened 1970s, who, “in fear and trembling,” was obliged to ask Robert McCloskey if he would permit the reprinting of “Make Way for Ducklings” without a dust jacket. McCloskey consented, though the experience “soured” him. Anyone who’s ever seen a 4-year-old handle a book will wonder why it had a dust jacket to begin with.
Libraries and librarians were perhaps the mightiest force in the children’s book world until the cutbacks of the 1970s and a boom in parental book-buying during the 1980s knocked them from their throne. In their heyday, children’s librarians imperiously banished series fiction (like the Tom Swift and Rover Boys books and, later on, Nancy Drew) from many collections, as well as the Little Golden Books — some of which number among my own childhood favorites. The prejudice against series, the most popular of which were formulaic adventure stories churned out by the Stratemeyer Syndicate, was so virulent that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s autobiographical novels about her pioneer childhood were repeatedly shut out of librarian-administered awards competitions like the Newbery Medal, merely because they seemed series-ish. (Eventually, the American Library Association created a lifetime achievement award in Wilder’s name and presented her with the first one in 1954.)
Although the titans of the genre, from Wilder and Dr. Seuss to E. B. White and Maurice Sendak, make brief appearances in “Minders of Make-Believe,” this is finally a publishing history, the sort of book whose typical event might be characterized as “And then she went to Scribner. ...” Marcus, a charming and nimble writer, makes a valiant effort to keep things interesting, but the editorial shake-ups and new printing technologies will be of interest primarily to historians and people in the industry. It’s the editor’s lot, alas, to subsist on reflected glory. The most interesting thing about even the most esteemed individuals that Marcus covers are the authors they discovered and the books they published, and there’s not quite enough about either in “Minders of Make-Believe.” The effect is a little like hanging around at a perfectly nice party while there’s a terrific one going on just down the hall.
Laura Miller is a staff writer for Salon and the author of “The Magician’s Book: A Skeptic’s Adventures in Narnia,” which will be published in December.
http://tinyurl.com/3g5f32
Friday, June 13, 2008
Free Spirit: Stories of You, Me and BC
If you are looking for a district purchase to spend money at the end of the year, try Free Spirit: Stories of You, Me and BC by Gerald Truscott.
I bought it last week and it is fascinating. Even includes Evergreen Playland, a DVD of BC tourism travelogues from the 1950s and 1960s. Appropriate for Grade 3 to adult.
http://www.royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/Shop/history.aspx?id=2897
I bought it last week and it is fascinating. Even includes Evergreen Playland, a DVD of BC tourism travelogues from the 1950s and 1960s. Appropriate for Grade 3 to adult.
http://www.royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/Shop/history.aspx?id=2897
ALSC Expands 'Great Web Sites for Kids'
By SLJ Staff -- School Library Journal, 6/13/2008
The Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC) has added several Web sites to Great Web Sites for Kids, its online resource of hundreds of links to commendable Web sites for children.
Great Web Sites for Kids features links to valuable Web sites, organized by subject headings such as animals; literature and languages; mathematics and computers; the arts; and history and biography. There is also a special section with sites of interest to parents, caregivers, and teachers and an area devoted to sites in Spanish. The ALSC Great Web Sites for Kids Committee maintains and updates the site.
“This spring, committee members reviewed approximately 100 Web sites for children aged birth to 14, in search of sites that are outstanding in content and conception,” says Karen Lemmons, cochair of the committee and a library media specialist at Howe Elementary School in Detroit. To qualify for Great Web sites for Kids, a site is put through a “rigorous evaluation and voting process by the committee before being deemed ‘great’ and added to the GWS page.”
ALSC’s Committee voted to add the following sites in spring 2008:
All Safe Sites
Amazing Space
Bnetsavvy
Debra Frasier
EMuseum at Minnesota State University
Ethan’s Bookshelf
FBI for Kids
Fun – Family Fun & Entertainment
Gymnasium for the Brain
Johnnie's Math Page
Kids Know It Network
Mary Jo Rhodes
Ology
TeachPeaceNow
Webrangers
The World of VictorYoung Adult (& Kids) Books Central
Members of the 2008 Great Web Sites for Kids Committee are: Lemmons; Becki Bishop, co-chair, Campbell Court Elementary School, Bassett, VA.; Amy Brown, Worthington Libraries, Columbus, OH; Robin Gibson, Granville, OH; Diana McFarland, Brunswick, ME; Carla Morris, Provo City (Utah) Library; Marilyn Sobotincic, Medina County (Ohio) District Library; Terrell Young, Washington State University, Richland.
The complete listing of great sites and selection criteria can be found at www.ala.org/greatsites
The Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC) has added several Web sites to Great Web Sites for Kids, its online resource of hundreds of links to commendable Web sites for children.
Great Web Sites for Kids features links to valuable Web sites, organized by subject headings such as animals; literature and languages; mathematics and computers; the arts; and history and biography. There is also a special section with sites of interest to parents, caregivers, and teachers and an area devoted to sites in Spanish. The ALSC Great Web Sites for Kids Committee maintains and updates the site.
“This spring, committee members reviewed approximately 100 Web sites for children aged birth to 14, in search of sites that are outstanding in content and conception,” says Karen Lemmons, cochair of the committee and a library media specialist at Howe Elementary School in Detroit. To qualify for Great Web sites for Kids, a site is put through a “rigorous evaluation and voting process by the committee before being deemed ‘great’ and added to the GWS page.”
ALSC’s Committee voted to add the following sites in spring 2008:
All Safe Sites
Amazing Space
Bnetsavvy
Debra Frasier
EMuseum at Minnesota State University
Ethan’s Bookshelf
FBI for Kids
Fun – Family Fun & Entertainment
Gymnasium for the Brain
Johnnie's Math Page
Kids Know It Network
Mary Jo Rhodes
Ology
TeachPeaceNow
Webrangers
The World of VictorYoung Adult (& Kids) Books Central
Members of the 2008 Great Web Sites for Kids Committee are: Lemmons; Becki Bishop, co-chair, Campbell Court Elementary School, Bassett, VA.; Amy Brown, Worthington Libraries, Columbus, OH; Robin Gibson, Granville, OH; Diana McFarland, Brunswick, ME; Carla Morris, Provo City (Utah) Library; Marilyn Sobotincic, Medina County (Ohio) District Library; Terrell Young, Washington State University, Richland.
The complete listing of great sites and selection criteria can be found at www.ala.org/greatsites
PROVINCE LAUNCHES BC150 COMMEMORATIVE STAMP AND BOOK
Office of the Premier
Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts
2008OTP0150-000893
June 13, 2008
VICTORIA – Another chapter in B.C.’s history was launched today with the unveiling of a new stamp and a book commemorating the province’s first 150 years, Premier Gordon Campbell announced.
“British Columbia: Spirit of the People” and this Canada Post stamp depicting the Gold Rush in British Columbia represent the achievements, triumphs and challenges that have shaped this great province we call home,” said Premier Campbell, who wrote the book’s foreword, The First 150 Years. “I want to thank author Jean Barman and stamp illustrator Adam Rogers for capturing the history and spirit of British Columbia and marking the 150th anniversary of the founding of British Columbia as a Crown Colony.”
The 52¢ stamp, illustrated by Adam Rogers, features a close-up image of a pioneer panning for gold. It represents the Gold Rush, a piece of provincial history that brought tens of thousands of people from all over the world to British Columbia in 1858. The BC150 commemorative stamp will be available to the public on Aug. 1, 2008.
“We are proud to mark the celebrations surrounding the 150th anniversary of British Columbia with a commemorative stamp,” said Bob Waite, chairman of the Stamp Advisory Committee and senior vice president, Corporate Social Responsibility at Canada Post. “Through the stamp program, we celebrate our country, our people, our heroes, our achievements and who we are as a nation. With this stamp, all Canadians can share in this milestone. Congratulations B.C.”
“British Columbia: Spirit of the People” was written by noted B.C. historian and bestselling author Jean Barman. Five thousand copies of the book will be distributed to schools, libraries and communities across the province over the next few months. The nearly 200-page book was written, published and printed in British Columbia and is available in bookstores throughout the province.
“British Columbia: Spirit of the People” is a book about us. Blending pictures and words, it tells our story,” said Barman. “We live in a province of tremendous beauty and diversity that is home to people committed to making this special place one of the very best on earth.”
“BC150 is a chance for us all to explore and celebrate what it means to be British Columbians,” said Tourism, Sport and the Arts Minister Stan Hagen. “The BC150 commemorative stamp and book will help showcase a piece of our province’s history, First Nations heritage, rich cultural diversity and widespread accomplishments to the rest of Canada and the world.”
BC150 is a celebration of the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Crown Colony of British Columbia in 1858. For more information BC150 events and programs, please visit www.bc150.ca.
Media contact:
Bridgitte Anderson
Press Secretary
Office of the Premier
604 307-7177
Victoria Klassen
Communications Manager
Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts
250 387-2799
For more information on government services or to subscribe to the Province’s news feeds using RSS, visit the Province’s website at www.gov.bc.ca.
Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts
2008OTP0150-000893
June 13, 2008
VICTORIA – Another chapter in B.C.’s history was launched today with the unveiling of a new stamp and a book commemorating the province’s first 150 years, Premier Gordon Campbell announced.
“British Columbia: Spirit of the People” and this Canada Post stamp depicting the Gold Rush in British Columbia represent the achievements, triumphs and challenges that have shaped this great province we call home,” said Premier Campbell, who wrote the book’s foreword, The First 150 Years. “I want to thank author Jean Barman and stamp illustrator Adam Rogers for capturing the history and spirit of British Columbia and marking the 150th anniversary of the founding of British Columbia as a Crown Colony.”
The 52¢ stamp, illustrated by Adam Rogers, features a close-up image of a pioneer panning for gold. It represents the Gold Rush, a piece of provincial history that brought tens of thousands of people from all over the world to British Columbia in 1858. The BC150 commemorative stamp will be available to the public on Aug. 1, 2008.
“We are proud to mark the celebrations surrounding the 150th anniversary of British Columbia with a commemorative stamp,” said Bob Waite, chairman of the Stamp Advisory Committee and senior vice president, Corporate Social Responsibility at Canada Post. “Through the stamp program, we celebrate our country, our people, our heroes, our achievements and who we are as a nation. With this stamp, all Canadians can share in this milestone. Congratulations B.C.”
“British Columbia: Spirit of the People” was written by noted B.C. historian and bestselling author Jean Barman. Five thousand copies of the book will be distributed to schools, libraries and communities across the province over the next few months. The nearly 200-page book was written, published and printed in British Columbia and is available in bookstores throughout the province.
“British Columbia: Spirit of the People” is a book about us. Blending pictures and words, it tells our story,” said Barman. “We live in a province of tremendous beauty and diversity that is home to people committed to making this special place one of the very best on earth.”
“BC150 is a chance for us all to explore and celebrate what it means to be British Columbians,” said Tourism, Sport and the Arts Minister Stan Hagen. “The BC150 commemorative stamp and book will help showcase a piece of our province’s history, First Nations heritage, rich cultural diversity and widespread accomplishments to the rest of Canada and the world.”
BC150 is a celebration of the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Crown Colony of British Columbia in 1858. For more information BC150 events and programs, please visit www.bc150.ca.
Media contact:
Bridgitte Anderson
Press Secretary
Office of the Premier
604 307-7177
Victoria Klassen
Communications Manager
Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts
250 387-2799
For more information on government services or to subscribe to the Province’s news feeds using RSS, visit the Province’s website at www.gov.bc.ca.
THE 2008 KIDS AND FAMILY READING REPORT™
THE 2008 KIDS AND FAMILY READING REPORT™CONDUCTED BY YANKELOVICH AND SCHOLASTIC
KIDS AGE 5-17 BELIEVE TECHNOLOGY WILL SUPPLEMENT – NOT REPLACE – BOOK READING AND SAY THEY WILL ALWAYS WANT TO READ BOOKS PRINTED ON PAPER
Tweens and Teens who Participate in Online Activities Are More Likely to Read Books for Fun Daily
Copyright bill's fine print a disturbing read
Federal strategy appears to mask rules that will reshape Canadians' rights over personal property
Michael Geist
Special to the Sun
Friday, June 13, 2008
In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a landmark copyright decision in a battle between the Law Society of Upper Canada, the Ontario legal bar association, and CCH Canadian, a leading legal publisher.
The court was faced with a dispute over an old technology -- photocopying in a law library -- and in a unanimous decision it ruled that the underlying purpose of copyright law is to serve the public interest. That interest, reasoned Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, is best served by balancing both user rights and creator rights.
On Thursday, Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Canadian Heritage Minister Josee Verner delivered what amounts to a stinging rebuke to the Supreme Court's copyright vision of public interest and balance. After months of internal discussions (though precious little public consultation), the government unveiled its much-anticipated copyright reform bill.
Casting aside the concerns of major business, education, and consumer groups, the bill seeks to dramatically tilt Canadian law toward greater enforcement and restrictions on the use of digital content, leading Liberal industry critic Scott Brison to warn that it could result in a "police state."
Prentice's strategy appears to have been to include a series of headline-grabbing provisions that would attract the support of the Canadian public and simultaneously mask rules that will reshape Canadians' rights over their personal property.
Accordingly, the bill includes a time-shifting provision that legalizes recording of television programs, a private copying of music provision that allows consumers to copy music onto their iPods, and a format-shifting provision that permits transferring content from analog to digital formats.
While those provisions sound attractive, Canadians would do well to read the fine print. The new rules are subject to a host of limitations -- Canadians can't retain recorded programs and backing up DVDs is not permitted -- that lessen their attractiveness. More worrisome are the "anti-circumvention provisions," which undermine not only these new consumer rights but also hold the prospect of locking Canadians out of their own digital content.
The law creates a blanket prohibition on picking the digital locks (often referred to as circumventing technological protection measures) that frequently accompany consumer products such as CDs, DVDs, and electronic books. In other words, Canadians that seek that to circumvent those products -- even if the Copyright Act permits their intended use -- will now violate the law.
While this sounds technical, circumvention is not uncommon. Under the Prentice bill, transferring music from a copy-protected product to an iPod could violate the law. So too could efforts to play a region-coded DVD from a non-Canadian region or students' attempts to copy-and-paste content from some electronic books.
The bill includes a few limited circumvention exceptions for privacy, encryption research, interoperable computer programs and security, yet the exceptions are largely illusory since the software programs needed to pick the digital lock in order to protect privacy or engage in research are banned.
Canadians should therefore check the fine print again -- the law suggests that they can protect their privacy, but renders the distribution of the tools to do so illegal.
The need to read the fine print does not end there -- a new statutory damage award of $500 for personal use infringement applies to music downloading that many believe is legal, while it does not cover uploading files onto peer-to-peer networks or even posting videos to YouTube. Similarly, a provision designed to allow librarians to create digital copies for patrons suffers from an exception that requires the digital copy to self-destruct within five days, effectively turning librarians into digital locksmiths.
Had Prentice and Verner respected the Supreme Court's emphasis on balance and the public interest, they could have easily avoided this one-sided approach.
Canada's earlier copyright bill, which died on the order paper in 2005, along with the approach in countries such as New Zealand, has identified a more balanced framework that preserves user rights by only prohibiting circumvention where the underlying purpose is to infringe copyright.
That approach ensures that the law targets commercial piracy rather than consumer property.
Instead, their self-described "made in Canada" solution actually looks an awful lot like the much-criticized U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Once Canadians read the fine print on this bill, many may demand that the government go back to the drawing board.
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He created the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that has over 42,000 members and advocates for balanced copyright reform. He can be reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.
Michael Geist
Special to the Sun
Friday, June 13, 2008
In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a landmark copyright decision in a battle between the Law Society of Upper Canada, the Ontario legal bar association, and CCH Canadian, a leading legal publisher.
The court was faced with a dispute over an old technology -- photocopying in a law library -- and in a unanimous decision it ruled that the underlying purpose of copyright law is to serve the public interest. That interest, reasoned Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, is best served by balancing both user rights and creator rights.
On Thursday, Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Canadian Heritage Minister Josee Verner delivered what amounts to a stinging rebuke to the Supreme Court's copyright vision of public interest and balance. After months of internal discussions (though precious little public consultation), the government unveiled its much-anticipated copyright reform bill.
Casting aside the concerns of major business, education, and consumer groups, the bill seeks to dramatically tilt Canadian law toward greater enforcement and restrictions on the use of digital content, leading Liberal industry critic Scott Brison to warn that it could result in a "police state."
Prentice's strategy appears to have been to include a series of headline-grabbing provisions that would attract the support of the Canadian public and simultaneously mask rules that will reshape Canadians' rights over their personal property.
Accordingly, the bill includes a time-shifting provision that legalizes recording of television programs, a private copying of music provision that allows consumers to copy music onto their iPods, and a format-shifting provision that permits transferring content from analog to digital formats.
While those provisions sound attractive, Canadians would do well to read the fine print. The new rules are subject to a host of limitations -- Canadians can't retain recorded programs and backing up DVDs is not permitted -- that lessen their attractiveness. More worrisome are the "anti-circumvention provisions," which undermine not only these new consumer rights but also hold the prospect of locking Canadians out of their own digital content.
The law creates a blanket prohibition on picking the digital locks (often referred to as circumventing technological protection measures) that frequently accompany consumer products such as CDs, DVDs, and electronic books. In other words, Canadians that seek that to circumvent those products -- even if the Copyright Act permits their intended use -- will now violate the law.
While this sounds technical, circumvention is not uncommon. Under the Prentice bill, transferring music from a copy-protected product to an iPod could violate the law. So too could efforts to play a region-coded DVD from a non-Canadian region or students' attempts to copy-and-paste content from some electronic books.
The bill includes a few limited circumvention exceptions for privacy, encryption research, interoperable computer programs and security, yet the exceptions are largely illusory since the software programs needed to pick the digital lock in order to protect privacy or engage in research are banned.
Canadians should therefore check the fine print again -- the law suggests that they can protect their privacy, but renders the distribution of the tools to do so illegal.
The need to read the fine print does not end there -- a new statutory damage award of $500 for personal use infringement applies to music downloading that many believe is legal, while it does not cover uploading files onto peer-to-peer networks or even posting videos to YouTube. Similarly, a provision designed to allow librarians to create digital copies for patrons suffers from an exception that requires the digital copy to self-destruct within five days, effectively turning librarians into digital locksmiths.
Had Prentice and Verner respected the Supreme Court's emphasis on balance and the public interest, they could have easily avoided this one-sided approach.
Canada's earlier copyright bill, which died on the order paper in 2005, along with the approach in countries such as New Zealand, has identified a more balanced framework that preserves user rights by only prohibiting circumvention where the underlying purpose is to infringe copyright.
That approach ensures that the law targets commercial piracy rather than consumer property.
Instead, their self-described "made in Canada" solution actually looks an awful lot like the much-criticized U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Once Canadians read the fine print on this bill, many may demand that the government go back to the drawing board.
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He created the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that has over 42,000 members and advocates for balanced copyright reform. He can be reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
New copyright bill aims hefty penalties
C-61 An Act to amend the Copyright Act
http://www.parl.gc.ca/legisinfo/index.asp?Language=E&Session=15&query=5466&List=toc
Sarah Schmidt
Canwest News Service
Thursday, June 12, 2008
OTTAWA - Consumers will be locked out of some digital content they have already paid for and face penalties up to $20,000 if they try to get around any digital lock to copy CDs or DVDs for themselves under Canada's proposed new copyright bill.
The federal government tabled the legislation in the House of Commons on Thursday, dubbing it as a "Made in Canada" solution to stamp out online piracy.
"This is truly a win-win for Canadian consumers who use digital technology and for everyone who creates material that becomes digitally accessible," said Industry Minister Jim Prentice.
But just as soon as the government unveiled the details, the proposal split members in the arts and business communities over whether the hard line approach is the right way to deal with consumers in the digital age. And some rebranded it as an American duplicate.
Only in cases where companies do not put a digital lock on their material will consumers be allowed to make a backup copy of a legally purchased CD or DVD, or transfer it to an MP3 player or another device for personal use. And while the new bill proposes to make expressly legal the "time shifting" of television programs through widely used personal video recorders, there is a catch.
The shows cannot be kept indefinitely to build a library of recordings, and if broadcasters block the ability to digitally record certain shows through broadcast flags, consumers will not be allowed to get around that lock legally. The legislation also proposes a ban against tools to circumvent digital locks.
"The effect of the digital lock provisions is to render these rights virtually meaningless in the digital environment because anything that is locked down cannot be copied," said Michael Geist, a law professor specializing in digital copyright at the University of Ottawa.
Prentice defended the approach, saying it strikes the right balance in changing times.
"Think about it in these terms: 10 years ago, the first portable MP3 player hit the market. The 1998 version bragged about storing up to one hour of music. Today's players can hold thousands of songs, videos and photographs," said Prentice, pointing out Canada's copyright law was last amended in 1997.
In cases where people download copyrighted songs or other digitized material, penalties will be capped at $500. But in cases where teenagers legally purchase songs online, then e-mail them to a friend or share them through a peer-to-peer service, this transgression will still carry a maximum penalty of $20,000 per copyrighted song.
Duncan McKie, president of the Canadian Independent Record Production Association, was quick to praise the government for starting "on the right road. I think they've addressed the right issues. I think they've been sensitive to everyone's concerns."
He added the music industry isn't keen to take regular consumers to court to collect damages. The industry is more "concerned with the most egregious violators, people who try to make a business out of the trade of illicit and infringing materials. I'm not really concerned about people in their basements sharing a few files here and there."
The Canadian Record Industry Association, the Canadian Music Publishers Association and the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists also applauded the draft legislation.
But the Canadian Music Creators Coalition slammed the bill, characterizing it as "an American-style approach to copyright. It's all locks and lawsuits," according to Safwan Javed, coalition member and drummer for Wide Mouth Mason.
"Rather than building a made-in-Canada proposal to help musicians get paid, the government has chosen to import American-style legislation that says the solution to the music industry's problems is suing our fans," said Javed.
The coalition of nearly 200 Canadian acts includes household names Avril Lavigne, Sarah McLachlan, Broken Social Scene, Matthew Good, Billy Talent, Sloan, Chantal Kreviazuk, Sum 41 and Sam Roberts.
The minister was set to table the legislation last December, but pulled it amid concerns the Canadian legislation too closely resembled the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act, recognized as the toughest legislation worldwide. Like the Canadian proposal, the U.S. law takes a hard line circumventing digital locks, even for legally purchased content for personal use.
If passed into law, Internet service providers in Canada will get a reprieve, an area where Canada deviates from provisions under U.S. law.
The American legislation requires ISPs to block access to allegedly infringing material or remove it from their system when they receive a notification claiming infringement from a copyright holder or their agent. The proposed legislation will require ISPs to forward a notice of infringement to the subscriber, a so-called "notice and notice" system already widely used voluntarily in Canada.
But Geist says an absence of a U.S.-style "notice and takedown" system under Canadian copyright law could be meaningless if Canada signs on to the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Prentice confirmed Thursday that the government is working to reach such a deal with international trading partners.
An ACTA discussion paper, recently leaked on the Internet, could require ISPs to filter out pirated material, hand over the identities of customers accused of copyright infringement, and restrict the use of online privacy tools.
The fate of the Canadian legislation was in doubt on the same day it was tabled, as opposition politicians lined up to question key aspects of the proposed legislation. The government will require support from some opposition Members of Parliament for the bill to become law. It could also die on the order paper if an election is held before it's fully debated.
Liberal heritage critic Denis Coderre suggested the maximum penalty of $500 for downloading copyrighted songs may not protect creators. Besides, he said, enforceability is a real problem. "Are we going to have cyber police now? How are they going to manage to go and keep respecting privacy in the house."
Charlie Angus, digital affairs for the NDP, said the digital lock provisions around personal use pose a real problem. "The fact is this bill was not created with any serious consultation with any of the stakeholders, except, as far as we could tell, the American lobby interests."
The proposed legislation creates specific education and research provisions, which will allow teachers and students to use material they find online as long as it's used for educational or training purposes. They'll also be able to use copyright material in lessons conducted over the Internet.
Librarians will also be to digitize print material and send a copy electronically to a client through an interlibrary loan. The client, in turn, can print a copy on their computer.
"This is a huge benefit for educational institutions, and certainly the publishers and authors will be disappointed by the breadth of it," said Mark Hayes, a partner in the Intellectual Property Group at the law firm of Blake, Cassels & Graydon.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/legisinfo/index.asp?Language=E&Session=15&query=5466&List=toc
Sarah Schmidt
Canwest News Service
Thursday, June 12, 2008
OTTAWA - Consumers will be locked out of some digital content they have already paid for and face penalties up to $20,000 if they try to get around any digital lock to copy CDs or DVDs for themselves under Canada's proposed new copyright bill.
The federal government tabled the legislation in the House of Commons on Thursday, dubbing it as a "Made in Canada" solution to stamp out online piracy.
"This is truly a win-win for Canadian consumers who use digital technology and for everyone who creates material that becomes digitally accessible," said Industry Minister Jim Prentice.
But just as soon as the government unveiled the details, the proposal split members in the arts and business communities over whether the hard line approach is the right way to deal with consumers in the digital age. And some rebranded it as an American duplicate.
Only in cases where companies do not put a digital lock on their material will consumers be allowed to make a backup copy of a legally purchased CD or DVD, or transfer it to an MP3 player or another device for personal use. And while the new bill proposes to make expressly legal the "time shifting" of television programs through widely used personal video recorders, there is a catch.
The shows cannot be kept indefinitely to build a library of recordings, and if broadcasters block the ability to digitally record certain shows through broadcast flags, consumers will not be allowed to get around that lock legally. The legislation also proposes a ban against tools to circumvent digital locks.
"The effect of the digital lock provisions is to render these rights virtually meaningless in the digital environment because anything that is locked down cannot be copied," said Michael Geist, a law professor specializing in digital copyright at the University of Ottawa.
Prentice defended the approach, saying it strikes the right balance in changing times.
"Think about it in these terms: 10 years ago, the first portable MP3 player hit the market. The 1998 version bragged about storing up to one hour of music. Today's players can hold thousands of songs, videos and photographs," said Prentice, pointing out Canada's copyright law was last amended in 1997.
In cases where people download copyrighted songs or other digitized material, penalties will be capped at $500. But in cases where teenagers legally purchase songs online, then e-mail them to a friend or share them through a peer-to-peer service, this transgression will still carry a maximum penalty of $20,000 per copyrighted song.
Duncan McKie, president of the Canadian Independent Record Production Association, was quick to praise the government for starting "on the right road. I think they've addressed the right issues. I think they've been sensitive to everyone's concerns."
He added the music industry isn't keen to take regular consumers to court to collect damages. The industry is more "concerned with the most egregious violators, people who try to make a business out of the trade of illicit and infringing materials. I'm not really concerned about people in their basements sharing a few files here and there."
The Canadian Record Industry Association, the Canadian Music Publishers Association and the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists also applauded the draft legislation.
But the Canadian Music Creators Coalition slammed the bill, characterizing it as "an American-style approach to copyright. It's all locks and lawsuits," according to Safwan Javed, coalition member and drummer for Wide Mouth Mason.
"Rather than building a made-in-Canada proposal to help musicians get paid, the government has chosen to import American-style legislation that says the solution to the music industry's problems is suing our fans," said Javed.
The coalition of nearly 200 Canadian acts includes household names Avril Lavigne, Sarah McLachlan, Broken Social Scene, Matthew Good, Billy Talent, Sloan, Chantal Kreviazuk, Sum 41 and Sam Roberts.
The minister was set to table the legislation last December, but pulled it amid concerns the Canadian legislation too closely resembled the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act, recognized as the toughest legislation worldwide. Like the Canadian proposal, the U.S. law takes a hard line circumventing digital locks, even for legally purchased content for personal use.
If passed into law, Internet service providers in Canada will get a reprieve, an area where Canada deviates from provisions under U.S. law.
The American legislation requires ISPs to block access to allegedly infringing material or remove it from their system when they receive a notification claiming infringement from a copyright holder or their agent. The proposed legislation will require ISPs to forward a notice of infringement to the subscriber, a so-called "notice and notice" system already widely used voluntarily in Canada.
But Geist says an absence of a U.S.-style "notice and takedown" system under Canadian copyright law could be meaningless if Canada signs on to the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Prentice confirmed Thursday that the government is working to reach such a deal with international trading partners.
An ACTA discussion paper, recently leaked on the Internet, could require ISPs to filter out pirated material, hand over the identities of customers accused of copyright infringement, and restrict the use of online privacy tools.
The fate of the Canadian legislation was in doubt on the same day it was tabled, as opposition politicians lined up to question key aspects of the proposed legislation. The government will require support from some opposition Members of Parliament for the bill to become law. It could also die on the order paper if an election is held before it's fully debated.
Liberal heritage critic Denis Coderre suggested the maximum penalty of $500 for downloading copyrighted songs may not protect creators. Besides, he said, enforceability is a real problem. "Are we going to have cyber police now? How are they going to manage to go and keep respecting privacy in the house."
Charlie Angus, digital affairs for the NDP, said the digital lock provisions around personal use pose a real problem. "The fact is this bill was not created with any serious consultation with any of the stakeholders, except, as far as we could tell, the American lobby interests."
The proposed legislation creates specific education and research provisions, which will allow teachers and students to use material they find online as long as it's used for educational or training purposes. They'll also be able to use copyright material in lessons conducted over the Internet.
Librarians will also be to digitize print material and send a copy electronically to a client through an interlibrary loan. The client, in turn, can print a copy on their computer.
"This is a huge benefit for educational institutions, and certainly the publishers and authors will be disappointed by the breadth of it," said Mark Hayes, a partner in the Intellectual Property Group at the law firm of Blake, Cassels & Graydon.
Canadian Library Association Disappointed with New Copyright Legislation
CLA
(Ottawa, June 12, 2008) – Today, the Canadian Library Association (CLA) expressed disappointment with the government’s newly announced copyright legislation, Bill C-61.
Bill C-61 is a missed opportunity and demonstrates that the government did not consult adequately with the user community, and did not listen to the concerns of Canadians. Overall, the Bill is extremely complex and will need more detailed study, but there are many glaring problems. Fundamentally, the Bill circumvents user rights.
One example is the missed opportunity on perceptual disabilities, where the Bill allows users to circumvent digital rights management (DRM) software, but does not allow them to import the technology to do so.
Another example is desktop delivery of interlibrary loan. Bill C-61 ignores the fact that the 2004 CCH Supreme Court Judgment already allows Canadian libraries to do desktop delivery of interlibrary loan. The provisions in Bill C-61 require libraries to lock up interlibrary loan with DRM, something that most libraries would not have the resources to accomplish. This would force many libraries back to delivering interlibrary loan via paper copies.
There is also a clear problem with criminalizing the circumvention of DRM. For a teenager, the criminal risk involved in shoplifting a CD would be safer rather than circumventing DRM on a CD they purchased to put it on their IPod. “Bill C-61 attempts to provide balance, but misses the boat for ordinary Canadians and over 21 million library users,” stated Rob Tiessen, Chair of the CLA Copyright Committee.
The Canadian Library Association (CLA) is Canada’s largest national and broad-based library association, representing the interests of public, academic, school and special libraries, professional librarians and library workers, and all those concerned about enhancing the quality of life of Canadians through information and literacy.
(Ottawa, June 12, 2008) – Today, the Canadian Library Association (CLA) expressed disappointment with the government’s newly announced copyright legislation, Bill C-61.
Bill C-61 is a missed opportunity and demonstrates that the government did not consult adequately with the user community, and did not listen to the concerns of Canadians. Overall, the Bill is extremely complex and will need more detailed study, but there are many glaring problems. Fundamentally, the Bill circumvents user rights.
One example is the missed opportunity on perceptual disabilities, where the Bill allows users to circumvent digital rights management (DRM) software, but does not allow them to import the technology to do so.
Another example is desktop delivery of interlibrary loan. Bill C-61 ignores the fact that the 2004 CCH Supreme Court Judgment already allows Canadian libraries to do desktop delivery of interlibrary loan. The provisions in Bill C-61 require libraries to lock up interlibrary loan with DRM, something that most libraries would not have the resources to accomplish. This would force many libraries back to delivering interlibrary loan via paper copies.
There is also a clear problem with criminalizing the circumvention of DRM. For a teenager, the criminal risk involved in shoplifting a CD would be safer rather than circumventing DRM on a CD they purchased to put it on their IPod. “Bill C-61 attempts to provide balance, but misses the boat for ordinary Canadians and over 21 million library users,” stated Rob Tiessen, Chair of the CLA Copyright Committee.
The Canadian Library Association (CLA) is Canada’s largest national and broad-based library association, representing the interests of public, academic, school and special libraries, professional librarians and library workers, and all those concerned about enhancing the quality of life of Canadians through information and literacy.
Tories table 'made-in-Canada' copyright bill
Canwest News Service
Thursday, June 12, 2008
OTTAWA - The federal government unveiled its controversial copyright legislation Wednesday, positioning it as a made-in-Canada solution to stamp out online piracy.
Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Heritage Minister Josee Verner introduced the bill in the House of Commons, six months after they pulled an earlier version at the last minute amid concerns the Canadian legislation too closely resembled the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act, recognized as the toughest copyright legislation in the world.
Canada's Copyright Act has not been amended since 1997 and the Conservative government says the law needs to be updated to keep up with changing consumer practices in the digital age. Internet file sharing and downloading are now typical, especially among young people.
But consumer groups have complained they haven't been consulted, and worry proposed changes will turn average Canadians into lawbreakers. Currently, for examples, consumers are technically not permitted by law to copy legally purchased material, including music and movies, onto their MP3 players for personal use.
The contentious legislation will only become law if the Conservatives can pick up support from some opposition members of Parliament. It could also die on the order paper if an election is held before it's fully debated.
The last attempt to amend the copyright law, by the previous Liberal government in 2005, failed after it generated too much criticism.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
OTTAWA - The federal government unveiled its controversial copyright legislation Wednesday, positioning it as a made-in-Canada solution to stamp out online piracy.
Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Heritage Minister Josee Verner introduced the bill in the House of Commons, six months after they pulled an earlier version at the last minute amid concerns the Canadian legislation too closely resembled the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act, recognized as the toughest copyright legislation in the world.
Canada's Copyright Act has not been amended since 1997 and the Conservative government says the law needs to be updated to keep up with changing consumer practices in the digital age. Internet file sharing and downloading are now typical, especially among young people.
But consumer groups have complained they haven't been consulted, and worry proposed changes will turn average Canadians into lawbreakers. Currently, for examples, consumers are technically not permitted by law to copy legally purchased material, including music and movies, onto their MP3 players for personal use.
The contentious legislation will only become law if the Conservatives can pick up support from some opposition members of Parliament. It could also die on the order paper if an election is held before it's fully debated.
The last attempt to amend the copyright law, by the previous Liberal government in 2005, failed after it generated too much criticism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)