[kwlug-disc] Your country needs you (or "Our MP is on the C-32 committee") and the Long Census
russellmcormond at gmail.com
Sun Nov 21 13:17:15 EST 2010
On 10-11-21 11:48 AM, Darryl O'Neill wrote:
> My point was that in one case the Tories are claiming that they don't
> want to Criminalize innocent Canadians and in the other they are
> perfectly willing to do it.
This message must be brought loudly and clearly to Peter Braid, and
the other Conservative members.
It requires some explanation to clarify that these are innocent
Canadians. Politicians have been lobbied hard and most currently
believe that the *ONLY* reason one would circumvent a TPM is to infringe
copyright. They have also been lobbied to believe that copyright
infringement, including non-commercial or private infringements, are a
critically serious issue that must be stopped (at nearly any cost). In
other words, they don't believe these are innocent Canadians.
They are unaware that what access controls do and what copyright
regulates are separate lists of activities. They are unaware that a
"use control" involves software running on hardware, and have never
given any thought about who owns that hardware (and thus who should be
managing any keys to any locks). They are also unaware that TPMs tend
to reduce revenues for creators, not increase as most often alleged.
The ultimate beneficiaries of TPMs are intermediaries like technology
providers, not creators.
If you haven't seen it, please look at http://BillC32.ca/petition/ict/
I created this petition after the 2006 election when the
Conservatives took power, as I believed that an "IT property rights"
message was one that would resonate with Conservatives. The hard part
has been getting into the door to have that conversation, and to explain
how these technologies work in the real world and thus how it impacts
various property rights and various existing provincial and federal laws.
The other hard part has been to get the petition in front of
Canadians. A signature is nice, but getting people to read the petition
allows them to far better understand the issue and to get involved.
While the Petition for Users Rights http://BillC32.ca/petition/ has
received almost 3K signatures, the IT property rights petition has only
(P.S. The activities of average Canadians we are talking about are
illegal, but not criminal in nature. While not important to most people,
these differences matter to lawyers/politicians/etc)
> My faith in the opposition parties is that
> they are willing to jump on this fact to make an issue out of it just to
> cause problems for the Tories. We still need to send a message to Peter
> Braid but I am not sure if he can talk while Harper is drinking water.
Here is why I personally believe that looking at this along
traditional party-lines will get us into deep trouble. The Liberals
are an obvious place to start.
They have 3 members in the C-32 committee: http://BillC32.ca/5249
Marc Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie, Liberal)
- This is their Industry critic, and the views I have heard from him
are typical of an Industry Committee member. Industry Committee members
have tended to bring in witnesses on other bills/issues from a wide span
of participants in the economy. Like the Industry Canada bureaucrats,
they tend to hold a more balanced view on copyright between the
interests of copyright holders and the right of other participants in
the economy (including consumers).
Pablo Rodriguez (Honoré-Mercier, Liberal)
- This is their Heritage critic, and the views I have heard from him
thus far are typical of a Heritage committee member. The department of
Canadian Heritage is partly in the business of funding various arts
groups and content industry players, and thus has constant interaction
with them. The same for the committee. They can be seen as under a
form of "regulatory capture" where they hear from and are focused on the
interests of the content and broadcast industries. I may disagree with
someone from Heritage on what is helpful vs. harmful to the interests of
creators, but that is the focus of their interests.
Dan McTeague (Pickering—Scarborough East, Liberal)
- While labeled by the Liberals as their Consumer Affairs critic,
this really only applies to gasoline consumers. He has also been an
active member of Industry committee. When it comes to copyright he can
be seen thus far as the parliamentary representative for the IIPA
http://www.iipa.com/ (RIAA, BSA, MPAA, etc and "Canadian" rebranding of
these organizations). These folks are not concerned with the interests
of creators, audiences or the wider economy, but only the interests of
the traditional intermediaries.
Over the last decade I have observed that the disagreements between
someone from Heritage and Industry (committees or bureaucrats in
departments) is greater than the disagreements between a Liberal or a
Conservative. The political lines are drawn Industry vs. Heritage, not
Liberal vs. Conservative vs. Bloc vs. NDP.
The largest exceptions have been Charlie Angus (NDP) who has been
Heritage critic at various times and maintains a balanced view, and Dan
McTeague who has been on Industry committee but has focused on some
narrow special interests.
Note 1: I've only met some of these folks in person http://flora.ca/mp ,
and have evaluated others based on public speeches/statements/articles/etc.
Note 2: I believe the Liberals gave away their hand a bit in naming Dan
McTeague to the committee rather than Justin Trudeau, given how
different views these two caucus members have on copyright.
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
"The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
portable media player from my cold dead hands!"
More information about the kwlug-disc