Sweeping federal copyright bill provokes strong reactions, for and against

MONTREAL - The bill aimed at modernizing Canada's Copyright Act is shaping up to be a love-it-or-hate-it affair.

Reaction to the proposed law came fast and furious after it was tabled in the House of Common on Wednesday.

There seemed to be little immediate consensus about who benefits most, but all stakeholders agreed it represented a significant shakeup of laws that have changed little since 1997.

For intellectual property lawyer Barry Sookman, the bill's highlights include a provision that would allow for so-called mash-ups _ the creation of new music and video from copyrighted material mixed together.

``It would probably be the most copyright-user-friendly bill anywhere in the world,'' said Sookman, who heads a technology law group at McCarthy Tetrault.

``Canadians would have rights that aren't available, say, in Australia or New Zealand or England.''

At the same time, business leaders, and especially Canada's video game industry, welcomed the bill's tough provisions prohibiting the cracking of digital locks.

``Without strong protection for our intellectual property, we're basically operating in a digital Wild West,'' said Danielle Parr, the executive director of the Entertainment Software Association of Canada.

``Promoting piracy under the guise of 'user rights' does nothing to defend the livelihood of thousands of Canadians who rely on turning great ideas into world-class entertainment.''

Those responsible for collecting royalties for Canadian musicians were somewhat less enamoured with the bill.

The Canadian Private Copying Collective was hoping it would include a levy on MP3 players, as already exists on blank CDs and mini-discs.

Instead the bill allows users to copy songs from their hard drive onto an MP3 player, known as format transfer, without breaking copyright laws.

``We find ourselves in a situation where there will be a significant decline in our royalties,'' said Annie Morin, the agency's chair.

``What is the difference between copying a song on a blank CD or onto a MP3 player?''

Others who felt left in the lurch by the proposed changes were university and college teachers, who felt that fair-use provisions did not go far enough.

The current law permits copyrighted material to be reproduced only for research, private study, news reporting, criticism and review. To those exceptions the new bill would add education, parody and satire.

But the country's leading university-teachers' union says the new exceptions are meaningless, as long as the ban on breaking digital locks exists.

``By imposing a blanket provision against all circumvention, the government will lock down a vast amount of digital material, effectively preventing its use for research, education and innovation, and curtailing the user rights of Canadians,'' the Canadian Association of University Teachers said in a news release.

The group's objections took Sookman, the intellectual-property lawyer, by surprise. He suggested the educational exception might be so beneficial to teachers it could hurt businesses.

``There could be a substantial loss of revenues to content-holders as a result of this bill _ particularly in the education sector,'' Sookman said.

``This is going to substantially impact Canadian publishers.''

The Conservatives will now try to convince opposition parties to strike a special Commons committee to study the bill over the summer.

The government is anxious to pass the bill after an earlier effort to update the Copyright Act failed two years ago.

The Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA), which represents 21,000 performers, said it is relieved to see the government taking steps to bring Canada's copyright laws into the 21st century but is alarmed that artists are being left out.

``We're happy to see that after 13 years of embarrassment on the world stage we're finally catching up to international norms by becoming WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) compliant,'' said Stephen Waddell, ACTRA's national executive director.

``But overall this bill is a real blow to artists.''

ACTRA national president Ferne Downey also expressed reservations.

''How is it `balanced' to allow people to make copies of our work without giving us anything in return? Half the bill is missing, the half that respects and pays creators,'' said Downey.

''The simple step of extending the private copying levy to digital devices is a win-win solution for consumers and artists, it seems like it would have been a no-brainer.''

The Canadian Intellectual Property Council (CIPC) welcomed the amendments.

``We applaud and fully support the government's efforts to update Canada's copyright regime,'' said CIPC chair Bob Weese.

``Canadian businesses need better protection against the enormous financial toll of online piracy. A strong and modern copyright law will also help our country compete more effectively in the global economy.''