SPEAKING OUT

Copyright reform and Bill C-32: striking a balance?
by Eric Baptiste

I am delighted, in this, my first Speaking Out column as SOCAN’s new CEO, to have the opportunity to comment on Bill C-32, the Copyright Modernization Act, which was tabled by Parliament on June 2 and proposes to amend Canada’s Copyright Act. The bill’s summary outlines the intent in amending the Copyright Act, which includes plans to:
• Update the rights and protections of copyright owners to better address the challenges and opportunities of the Internet;
• Clarify Internet service providers’ liability and make the enabling of online copyright infringement itself an infringement of copyright;
• Permit businesses, educators and libraries to make greater use of copyright material in digital form;
• Permit certain uses of copyright material by consumers;
• Ensure the Act remains technologically neutral;
• Mandate copyright review by Parliament every five years.

SOCAN considers these intentions laudable. Canada must ensure that its laws are consistent with international standards and these standards primarily acknowledge — as they should — the rights of creators in the digital marketplace. However, the government’s assumed role in copyright-law reform is to balance the sometimes competing interests of copyright owners and businesses that use copyrighted works. Many factors can upset that balance and creators’ rights can be hindered or ignored in the process. Unfairness can result when exceptions to the rights of copyright owners are expanded beyond what’s really necessary.

For example, the proposed law would no longer make it an infringement for consumers to copy the musical works they have purchased onto devices such as MP3 players — for personal use. SOCAN has no problem with that. However, the law does not provide a corresponding compensation to rights holders for the new legal recognition of the ability to make copies. As a result, it creates an unjust situation for copyright owners as users are granted expanded rights to privately copy musical works with no corresponding expansion of private-copying remuneration for the copyright owners.

In another example, by creating numerous exceptions for education, the proposed law may negatively impact those copyright owners whose primary business — and income — lies in providing educational materials. Finally, provisions in the bill that attempt to clarify the role of Internet service providers in preventing copyright infringement will likely encourage litigation, as those who do not wish to pay for the exploitation of copyright will suggest that these provisions support their position and copyright owners will suggest the opposite.

It is SOCAN’s view that, although it strives to achieve a balance, the bill falls short. We believe Parliament must now make changes to the proposed law to ensure that a balance is indeed achieved and that this balance results in fairness to all those who will be affected by the legislation. SOCAN looks forward to contributing to the copyright reform process in the hopes of striking a better balance, a balance that is fair to all, including creators.

Speaking Out 2010

• Summer
• Spring
  

Speaking Out 2009

• Winter
• Autumn

Uploaded Summer 2010


Comments? Questions? Suggestions?
Send them to Rick MacMillan, Words + Music Corporate Editor, at wordsandmusic@socan.ca.

Back to issue