As if the pressure from US based lobby groups and trade organizations like the USTR and the MPAA wasn’t threatening enough to Canadian sovereignty, it now appears that the European Union has decided to throw its weight around in an effort to influence Canadian policy. Canada and the EU are in the midst of negotiating the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). The virtues of such Agreement are being bestowed by Industry Canada as:

Liberalizing trade in goods and services could bring a potential 20% boost to bilateral trade and GDP gains of up to $12 billion (or €8.2 billion) for Canada by 2014. A CETA with the EU could deliver commercial benefits across many goods sectors, including aerospace, chemicals, plastics, wood products, aluminum, fish and seafood, light vehicles and automotive parts, and agriculture products such as wheat, beef, and pork; it could also deliver benefits across services sectors such as transportation, engineering and computer services. The study also shows potential for enhancing the relationship in areas such as investment, labour mobility, regulatory cooperation, environment, and science and technology.

However, as the omnipresent Michael Geist and The Wire explain, the devil is in the details. While this new trade agreement may indeed be beneficial to boosting bilateral trade and providing all the economic advantages that come with it, it also provides a conduit to shaping and influencing Canada’s domestic IP polices. A recently leaked document outlines plans for increased political pressure against Canada and dismisses the 2009 consultations on copyright as a “tactic to confuse”.

Now a second document has leaked, though it is not currently available online. The Wire Report reports that an EU document dated November 16, 2009, features candid comments about Canada and the EU strategy. The document, called a “Barrier Hymn Sheet” leaves little doubt about the EU’s objective:

“Put pressure on Canada so that they take IPR issues seriously and remedy the many shortcomings of their IPR protection and enforcement regime…”

The document states that the trade negotiations are a “unique opportunity [for Canada] to upgrade its IPR regime despite local anti-IPR lobbying.” It includes an assessment of recent copyright reform efforts, noting that two bills have died due to “political instability.” The document adds that the copyright reform process was revived in 2009 with the national copyright consultation, but notes dismissively it may have been a “tactic to confuse.”

The Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights is proud to announce that Canadian video game developer Battlegoat Studios has become a coalition member.

BattleGoat Studios is a Canadian Software Developer committed to developing leading edge “Intelligent Strategy Games” for the PC…the team firmly believes that Strategy Gamers are looking for more sophisticated games that also remain fun to play. BattleGoat insists that their approach to development will always emphasize an accurate, heavily researched environment assuring players an entertaining and immersive gameplay experience.

Founder and lead developer George Geczy has been very open and frank when discussing copyright reform in Canada as evidenced by his Copyright Consultation Submission. As a successful and independent Canadian game developer, Geczy felt it imperative to directly address The Entertainment Software Association of Canada to make it clear that their anti-consumer views on copyright are not representative of BattleGoat Studios’ views or that of many other small and mid-size Canadian developers. Geczy continued:

Your comments and proposals completely disregard the final consumer – the video game purchaser and player – and the fact that they, too, deserve certain rights in a fair system. Rights
such as the ability to continue to play a game after a user’s system has been upgraded or replaced; the ability to backup a PC game to protect from system failure; the ability to continue playing a legally purchased game after a publisher goes out of business and the ‘authentication’ server is taken off line; and so on. Your insistence on anti-circumvention legislation for Canada is a direct assault on the very customers who buy video game products.

The addition of independent game developer, BattleGoat Studios, to the Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights galvanizes the calls from Canadians for fair and balanced copyright reforms that maintain technologically neutrality. A reformed copyright regime that takes into careful consideration the rights of consumers as well as creators. A framework that will not be trumped by international trade agreements negotiated in complete secrecy without public consultation or consideration.

After less than a month in office the new US Ambassador to Canada wasted little time re-hashing the stereotypical view of Canada and its supposed lax copyright laws. Speaking at a conference in Montreal on Canada-US relations, David Jacobson indicated that Canada deserves its position on the USTR’s Priority Watch List for not legislating copyright reforms dictated by the US (read: lobbyists, corporations).

Considering Mr Jacobson’s litigious past, he spent over 30 years at the prestigious Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP, one shouldn’t be too surprised by his rhetorical salvo against Canada and its copyright laws. Canadians can expect more of the same from Mr Jacobson and his office. It just remains to be seen whether the Harper Government will choose to amend Canada’s Copyright Act in a manner consistent with Canadian’s views and ideals or the bullying tactics of US litigators, lobbyists and trade groups.

Sonnenschein’s Intellectual Property & Technology Practice includes an active and extensive international trademark and patent practice. The firm has established a network of foreign counsel—local intellectual property practitioners in countries around the world—who provide vast and wide-ranging expertise in the laws of the countries in which the firm’s clients conduct business, source manufacturing, distribute products or chase infringements and counterfeits.

It seems Mr Jacobson’s message is getting through to Canada’s monopolistic-like media outlets and their mis-informed editors. I would invite Mr McKenna and other interested readers to inform themselves with this well written piece at TechDirt. Or if you prefer a well researched piece containing actual statistics and numbers, read here.

Bill C-27 would strike a serious blow to DRM by requiring consent be obtained prior to installing software on a computer.

The DRM concern arises from a requirement in the bill to obtain consent before installing software programs on users’ computers. This anti-spyware provision applies broadly, setting an appropriate standard of protection for computer users. Yet the copyright lobby fears it could inhibit installation of DRM-type software without full knowledge and consent. Sources say that the Liberals have introduced a motion that would take these practices outside of the bill. In its place, they would define computer program as, among other things, “a program that has as its primary function…inducing a user to install software by intentionally misrepresenting that installing that software is necessary to safeguard security or privacy or to open or play content of a computer program.” This sets such a high bar – primary function, intentional mispresentation – that music and software industry can plausibly argue that surreptitious DRM installations fall outside of C-27.

Even more startling are the changes to Bill C-27 being sought after by the copyright lobby which would effectively permit copyright owners to secretly access information on users’ computers.

PIPEDA currently features a series of exceptions to the standard requirements for obtaining consent for the collection of personal information (found in Section 7). Bill C-27 includes a provision that bars those exceptions in cases involving computer harvesting of email addresses and the “collection of personal information through any means of telecommunication, if the collection is made by accessing a computer system or causing a computer system to be accessed without authorization.” In other words, email harvesting and spyware would not be permitted and would not qualify for the PIPEDA exceptions found in Section 7.

The copyright lobby is deeply concerned that this change will block attempts to track possible infringement through electronic means. The Section 7(1)(b) exception in PIPEDA currently states that collecting personal information without consent or knowledge of the individual is permitted if it is reasonable to expect that the collection “would compromise the availability or accuracy of the information” and the collection is “related to investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada.”

The committee’s “clause by clause” review of the Bill was to be conducted today however it appears that intense lobbying pressure was successful in securing an adjournment until Wednesday October 21, 2009. The Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights urges you to use the next 48 hours and write to Industry Minister Tony Clement and other members of the committee and demand they reject changes to Bill C-27 that would support the clandestine deployment and use of DRM or changes that would leave the door open to “private surreptitious surveillance”. Other committee members include:

• Michael Chong (Con), Chair
• Anthony Rota (Lib), Vice-Chair
• Robert Bouchard (BQ), Vice-Chair
• Gordon Brown (Con)
• Siobhan Coady (Lib)
• Marc Garneau (Lib)
• Mike Lake (Con)
• Brian Masse (NDP)
• Dave Van Kesteren (Con)
• Robert Vincent (BQ)
• Mike Wallace (Con)
• Chris Warkentin (Con)

Our copyright consultation search engine is currently limited to searching official submissions however we plan on adding the ability to search submissions and discussions independently as well as viewed cached pages of the Government website in the coming days.

• To promote enforcement
• To fight piracy and counterfeits
• To promote public & private partnerships on piracy and counterfeits

Both the U.S. and EU governments and industry representatives shared concerns on IPR enforcement in Canada. ESA representatives went on to suggest that ACTA be used as a means of “raising the bar” in Canada to force Canadian government to respect TPMs and uphold its IPR commitments. U.S. representatives responded by stating that they expect all parties involved in ACTA to uphold the provisions put forth in the agreement, and will not accommodate the “lowest common denominator.”

It now appears that even if Canada modernizes its copyright regime to meet its international obligations, ACTA could be used to ‘circumvent’ domestic copyright laws and tip the balance between consumer and creator rights in favour of distributors, lobby groups and litigious-happy lawyers. While the Canadian government has been open with their public consultations on copyright reform, Canadians are left wondering how and why ACTA, an agreement which threatens to supersede the domestic Copyright Act, is so secretive and non-transparent.

“Internet piracy of video-game software in Canada has undergone explosive growth, and we detected a stunning 300 percent increase in the number of games illegally downloaded via Canadian ISPs between 2007 and 2008 (and this reflects but a fraction of the total illegal downloads in Canada detected by the industry as a whole).”

This outrageous statement leads us to ask just how exactly did the Entertainment Software Association of Canada track and detect this “explosive growth” in piracy at the ISP level in Canada? It should be very worrisome to all Canadian consumers that their privacy is being compromised to permit an American lobby group to detect and monitor the flow of illegal downloads passing through Canadian ISPs.

Failing to protect TPMs under the law effectively means that the government is dictating the business model, which is bad news for business and for consumers.

Simply stated protections for TPMs and DRM do not work and they do not benefit consumers or creators in the ways they are intended to. Protecting TPMs only protects distributors and lobby groups at the expense of consumer access and creative innovation. By failing to bend to an American lobby group such as the ESA one can hardly think that the government of Canada can be seen as “dictating” any particular business model. By remaining technologically neutral and not integrating protection for specific technologies or business models into an amended Copyright Act (e.g. all-encompassing prohibition of circumvention devices and technologies) you end up with a flexible law that can adapt to protect the interests of both creators and consumers.

Given the ESA’s mis-aligned approach to copyright reform, the CCER encourages Canadian lawmakers to not ignore the opinions of typical Canadians as evidenced here. It would appear that The ESA is somewhat of a lone wolf in its desires to protect TPM’s as evidenced by the very low percentage of submissions to the Copyright Consultations that call for similar type legislation. One can only hope that these special interest lobby groups don’t continue to insult our intelligence or taint the media any further with their inaccurate, unfounded and most importantly false claims.

The CCER physically mails a copy of every letter submitted via our letter wizard to each of the ministers responsible for copyright reform in Canada

TorrentFreak has posted an article entitled: Prevent Canada from Becoming a Copyright Police State. In this article, Ernesto details how the old guard of corporate interests and lobby groups are threatening to direct copyright legislation in such a way to protect their antiquated and outmoded business models.

Well, TorrentFreak appears to have struck an especially sensitive chord amongst Canadians as the CCER has seen a tremendous boost in its Letter Writing Wizard submissions. Less than 24 hours ago @copyrightcanada tweeted “We’ve received over 1000 formal submissions!” Since this tweet went out CCER has received more than 1300 submissions to the official consultations on copyright via our letter writing wizard, more than doubling the number of submissions to the Government consultations on copyright thus far.

Although it is the middle of summer, and the Government’s Copyright Consultation website has not been well advertised and the Round Tables have been criticized as closed door and imbalanced, the opinions and passion of average Canadians cannot be ignored.