Bill C-61 Question and "Answer" with Jim Prentice

Another great post on Bill C-61 and copyright issues from AGRDT guest poster, mj.

While writing Bill C-61 (Canada’s contentious new copyright reform bill), Minister of Industry Jim Prentice repeatedly insisted that he would only answer questions about the bill once it had been tabled.  Well C-61 has been tabled, and minister Prentice appeared on CBC Radio’s technology show Radio Search Engine to finally 'answer' [read: side-step and/or muddle] questions about the bill.

Here are some highlights from his interview:

Prentice is asked a simple yes or no question about whether it is legal to convert CDs with digital locks to mp3s.  The question arises because a listener’s grandfather is concerned because having already purchased the some music on vinyl, then again on CD, he does not want to purchase the same music for a third time in mp3 format.  Prentice suggests that the CDs probably don’t have digital locks on them, despite the question explicitly stating that they do.  He goes on to suggest that digital locks don't matter anyway, because
the industry is moving away from them (if that's the case, I want to know why digital locks are such a prominent part of C-61).  Prentice then says that yes, breaking a digital lock to format-shift a CD is
illegal, but don't worry about it because the record companies probably won't pursue you for a measly $500.  Despite the Minister's nonchalance, the bill C-61 fact sheets clearly state that:

“…if you hack a digital lock to enable any kind of infringement, (e.g., hacking the anti-copying mechanisms of a computer game to make an unauthorized copy), you would be subject for up to $20 000 in statutory damages.”

Next, Prentice is asked whether there is any guarantee that damages awarded for copyright infringement will find their way to the content creators, rather than the media companies.  Prentice talks in circles, repeats some spin about how the bill has exemptions for individuals, and doesn’t answer the question.

Then, the Minister is asked about unlocking cellphones so they can be used overseas.  Prentice calls the question “arcane” (arcane? um, how many people use cellphones?) and then suggests that it is OK to break digital locks to make a device usable, but only if you're overseas when you do it.  BREAKING NEWS: Canadian laws don’t apply in other countries!  He doesn’t answer the question about unlocking cellphones in Canada.

Then comes the money question. Prentice is  asked about what I consider to be the biggest issue: what is stopping media companies from adding DRM to everything and therefore nullifying all of the consumer rights granted by C-61? Prentice says “The market will take care of that” and promptly hangs up while the host is trying to ask another question about how the new laws will be enforced. Wow.

I listened to the interview and came away with the following conclusions:

1. Prentice has no idea what the hell he is talking about when it comes to technology, or the bill he just introduced.
2. Prentice assumes the average Canadian is as ignorant as he is (notice the comments about “fairly technical” and “arcane issues”, as if only a few people understand or care about the questions that were asked).
3. Prentice is not at all interested in answering legitimate questions from concerned Canadians about his “Made in Canada” legislation (I find this to be particularly disgusting).

Listen to the interview for yourself here (streaming) or here (mp3).

Just in case you haven't gotten your fill of evasive answers to important questions about C-61, be sure to check out Prentice and Minister of Heritage Josée Verner on YouTube.   

Here is a little teaser from the YouTube video:

Reporter’s question:
“What if a teenager uploads a whole lot?  Is that $20,000 worth of fines if they decide to just upload a bunch of stuff?”

Prentice’s answer:
“If a teenager, uh, uploads, uh, music and it has been acquired legally, then, um, under the bill this is material that they are allowed to, uh, format shift, they’re allowed to put it on their own computer, they’re allowed to put it on their iPod.  Um, if they engage in conduct which is a different kind of infringement, in terms of, of, uh sharing it, then the law both today and afterwards provides uh, uh,  for remedies.  And so, you know, in that situation, uh, the accused teenager has to deal with the consequences in either case.”

A much simpler (and true) answer would have been:
“Yes.”

- mj

Comments

[Trevor]

It sucks that the Libs had to introduce their Green Shift Plan right after C-61 was tabled. I fear that with the lack of attention, C-61 is gonna go right through parliament without any resistance.

[eh]

I agree(!?), Trevor. Luckily the bill died on the Order Paper with the prorogation of Parliament yesterday. The Conservatives will have to re-table it in the fall if they want it to become law. That might renew public interest, if it lapses over the summer.

[Trevor]

Nice, I didn't know that. Maybe public backlash will make them re-think this over the summer.

[Saskboy]

Neither Prentice nor Vernier understand technology. I doubt Prentice has used an iPod more than a little, and would probably curse a blue streak if he ever got a computer virus and formatted (he'd not know how to back up his DRM'ed music).

Vernier using "download" for "upload" was not an english/french language barrier, it's a technology one. These people are not competent to write a bill that is technology based.

Also, why is the same protection of "digital locking" not provided in the analogue world to creators who can't ditially lock their content? A painter can copyright a work, but they only get $500, not $20,000 if they sue someone! How does that "protect" or "balance" anything?

[Jewel]

Wow. Thanks for the info about this particular interview. Really seals on the deal on how completely incompetent and out of touch the Conservatives are.