More

HuffPost Social Reading

Debate On Copyright Bill To Be Limited

Copyright Bill Canada

First Posted: 02/ 8/2012 9:26 am Updated: 02/ 9/2012 4:35 pm

Amazing
 Inspiring
 Funny
 Scary
 Hot
 Crazy
 Important
 Weird


The Conservatives succeeded Wednesday in passing another motion to limit debate, this time on second reading of the copyright reform bill.


Government House Leader Peter Van Loan moved a time allocation motion on the copyright reform bill Wednesday that will limit remaining debate at second reading to two more days.


Following that debate and a vote, the bill will go to a committee for further study.


"We want to get this done and it's time the opposition stop delaying," Heritage Minister James Moore said as debate on the time allocation motion got underway Thursday after question period. He said there will be opportunities for substantive debate at the committee stage and that the government wants to hear proposed amendments from the opposition parties.


The opposition parties, however, complained that the government is "muzzling" debate and stifling democracy with its repeated use of time allocation on its legislation.


The NDP's Joe Comartin said Parliament is being turned into a "farce."


"They are shutting down debate just repeatedly," he said.


When Van Loan served notice Tuesday that the Conservatives intended to limit debate on the copyright bill, he said he tried to reach an agreement with the NDP but the Official Opposition "wouldn't commit to any reasonable, cooperative approach," so he would instead table a time allocation motion.


To date, the bill has been before the House at second reading on seven different days since October.


Van Loan said the bill "will provide a boost to the digital and creative sectors, which employ Canadians in high-quality jobs."


"This bill has already been the subject of 75 speeches in this House and an opposition motion to block it from ever getting to second reading. In the previous Parliament, by contrast, the identical bill was sent to committee after only seven hours of constructive debate," said Van Loan.


This latest attempt to reform the act began in September with a new bill, after the previous one died because of the spring election. With the old bill, a special committee was set up to study it and dozens of witnesses and submissions were made from a range of stakeholders.


The government introduced an identical text with C-11, but there will be chances to amend it at the committee stage.


Related on HuffPost:

What Canadian Copyright Bill Means For You
1  of  15
PLAY
FULLSCREEN
ZOOM
SHARE THIS SLIDE 
The Copyright Modernization Act, Bill C-11, will allow Canadians to copy content from one device to another, such as from a CD to a computer or an iPod. This provision, however, does not apply to content protected by a digital lock, which is any technological measure, such as encryption or digital signatures, that rights holders use to restrict access to or prevent the copying or playing of CDs, DVDs, e-books, digital files and other material. (Ryan Anson/AFP/Getty Images)

Slides use files from CBC
MORE SLIDESHOWS NEXT >   |   < PREV
FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

The Conservatives succeeded Wednesday in passing another motion to limit debate, this time on second reading of the copyright reform bill. Government House Leader Peter Van Lo...
The Conservatives succeeded Wednesday in passing another motion to limit debate, this time on second reading of the copyright reform bill. Government House Leader Peter Van Lo...
Related News On Huffington Post:
 

Read more from Huffington Post bloggers:
Michael Geist

Michael Geist: The Supreme Court of Canada Copyright Hearings, Day One: Fair Dealing Scare Tactics Fall Flat

The Supreme Court of Canada heard three of the five scheduled copyright cases yesterday in an unprecedented focus on copyright. The case featured discussion on how services like song previews or downloadable video games provide revenues for both music creators and the companies.
Michael Geist

Michael Geist: Why a SOPA Version of the Canadian Copyright Bill Could Target YouTube

The Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright has already expressed concern with the Bill C-11 digital lock rules. Turning Bill C-11 into a Canadian SOPA would only make matters worse, creating a legal framework that would harm Canadian business and consumers.
Michael Geist

Michael Geist: What If SOPA Came to Canada?

While SOPA may be dead (for now) in the U.S., lobby groups are likely to intensify their efforts to export SOPA-like rules to other countries. With Bill C-11 back on the legislative agenda at the end of the month, Canada will be a prime target for SOPA-style rules.

Filed by Michael Bolen  | 

More in Canada Politics...


 
 
  • Comments
  • 113
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
yer
Stop the Alberta Taliban
107 Fans
07:35 PM on 02/10/2012
these are dead industries. Government should not be protecting them.
Permalink  |
photo
EnzoLampGuru
23 Fans
 
11:26 AM on 02/10/2012
Let's take some action. You can sign a petition against Bill C-11 at Open Media
Less talk and more actions will take us to a good resulthttp://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/02/08/copyright-bill-canada-c11-modernization-act_n_1262453.html#
Permalink  |
thediamond0000
32 Fans
08:01 PM on 02/09/2012
Im in the Creative and Digital Industry, and I DO NOT want this to go through.

Harper muzzling everyone.
Canada is slowly becoming a joke.
Permalink  |
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
339 Fans
02:46 PM on 02/09/2012
What these entertainment giants fail to realize, is that wiping out all forms of piracy won't do much to bring them additional revenues.

Removing peoples ability to download your, say, movie for free, won't send them running to the movie thearther, they'll simply entertain themselves on whatever other free entertainment they can get their hands on.

Some in the gaming industry have caught on and now offer their games for free, and simply make their money using micro payment services.

The same can be made for movies. Make a cheap low quality copy of the film available freely online on a advertisement funded website, and start with the micro payments. For 5$, you can download a low quality copy and watch it all you want, or for 5$ you can one-time stream the movie in good quality. 10$ and you can download that good quality version and watch it all you want. 10$ to watch a one-time steam of the movie in HD, and for 15$, you can download the HD copy and watch it all you want.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stopgeorge
Paper Ballots WORK. Unverifiable e-voting doesn't
309 Fans
04:09 PM on 02/09/2012
Absolutely correct. And, as was mentioned before, people will find ways around this.

The entertainment industry had 20 years+ to find a new business model. They new it was coming. Instead, they were lazy and hired more lawyers.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
Bipolar-Playing life on hard mode!
409 Fans
 
08:28 AM on 02/09/2012
For the Harper Government to limit debate on every issue is to deny Canadian Citizens their rights through their elected MP's. This is not democracy.
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
BlackRabbit
144 Fans
04:00 PM on 02/10/2012
Unlimited debate is unreasonable. If the opposition adopts a tactic of endless debate to block legislation they oppose, government would grid to a halt.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Skepticat
Supporting skeptical felines everywhere
845 Fans
04:29 PM on 02/10/2012
Shutting off debate isn't reasonable either. When you get governments routinely doing this you will inevitably get flawed leglislation - worse if they are dogmatic ideologs. There hasn't been any politician anywhere on the planet - ever - that has been so flawless correct about everything that proposed leglislature shouldn't be subject to some critical review. As a citizen I'd like to learn a bit more about what the Harper (or any other) government has in mind before - rather than after the fact - and debates be they self serving or not - get a chance to look at issues perhaps not thought of by the drafters of the bill.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
Bipolar-Playing life on hard mode!
409 Fans
 
05:52 PM on 02/10/2012
Healthy debate is part of any decent democracy. The opposition has not even engaged in what you describe. The Harper Government is stifling ALL debate, MPs have a right to get their thoughts about legislation on the books. Thats why we HAVE a parliament.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stopgeorge
Paper Ballots WORK. Unverifiable e-voting doesn't
309 Fans
08:00 PM on 02/08/2012
Why is this now off the front page?!!

This should be HUGE news.
Permalink  |
islander800
47 Fans
07:33 PM on 02/08/2012
Do these Reform jokers not limit debate on any bills?

Seems they need a lesson in what the opposition's function is in the House.

Keep it up, boys, and you'll have less support than Kim Campbell come next election.
Permalink  |
SamEasy
You really don`t want to know.
237 Fans
01:56 AM on 02/09/2012
We desperately need for your last comment become true. This Government is a Dictatroship, not at all respresentative of a democratic process.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stopgeorge
Paper Ballots WORK. Unverifiable e-voting doesn't
309 Fans
05:48 PM on 02/08/2012
What does this Canadian copyright law mean for me?

It means that a whole can of worms has been opened up where I could be charged for what was an innocent action before. It means the Corporations dictate what I can or can not do with my own property.
Permalink  |
photo
Mools
232 Fans
 
04:56 PM on 02/08/2012
This is BS. Current Copyright laws already far over-reach the original intent of copyright when it was first created. That is, to give the creator of something reasonable time to profit before it becomes part of the commons. The idea was why would anyone create something new if someone could immediately make a copy and/or sell it.

However, since the original creationg, copyright law has been extended and strenghtened to the point where it actually suppresses the creation of new works as well as reduces access to information. For example, ask any teacher what they think any time copyright laws get "strengthened". It usually means "fair use" gets taken away or reduced and then they have to decide to spend MORE money they don't have on learning materials/information or go without.

And all these changes have less to do with protecting artists as they are about corporate profits. There is no reason a copyright on a book needs to go for 50 - 75 years after the author dies. And take a look at that guy who wrote an unofficial sequal to Catcher in the Rye. He was sued and can't sell the book in north america because, even though it is a completely original work not directly connected to Salinger's.

The only copyright legislation I will ever support is legislation that turns copyright law back to what it was when first developed.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sdgreen
42 Fans
04:50 PM on 02/08/2012
Bill C-11 is totally unacceptable! Frankly, if I buy a video, a book, a piece of music, I will use such as I see fit. The purchase price already includes payment/royalties/profit to the authors and publishers. Copyright laws are just ignorant as they stand inspired by fat plump parasites in the music and movie industry. Copy right laws have created a whole new industry of 'collectives' who gain another mega buck from users. The entire copy right system is grossly punitive to users, who have already paid their pound of flesh for the product.

The notion that ISPs are now to become overlords is equally repugnant and totally not acceptable to them or people that use their services. The ISP is there to provide data streams not to act as Police!

Contact your MP in Ottawa and tell them to abolish Bill C-11!
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
74 Fans
04:41 PM on 02/08/2012
Much ado about nothing.
And the usual hysterical response
The article clearly states the amount of debate and discussion on this bill over two seperate sittings of parliament and we still hear the laments over the lack of debate.
Four more years guys.
How will you cope?
Permalink  |
photo
Mools
232 Fans
 
04:59 PM on 02/08/2012
Have you read the hansard? Those two separate debates may be only a few minutes each. They may be the opposition asking questions or raising concerns and the Conservatives refusing to give answers/details because they plan on doing what they want regardless. Which is their right as the party in power...I openly admit that. But let's be perfectly honest here. It is disingenuous of the conservatives to try and pretend like they care about anything the opposition says or wants.

The debate/question period is pretty much just a technicality for them at this point. Something they have to tolerate for a certain time before pushing bills through. That is disrespcetful of democracy and process no matter WHAT party does it, I think.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
74 Fans
06:31 PM on 02/08/2012
Nothing new about this.
The Harper gvernment played the Libs and NDP like cheap fiddles when they were a minority government.
Now he doesn't have to spend as much time placating either side.
And considering how little the other two parties have to offer to the process (other than diversion) they can get down to doing what majority governments have always done in this country.
Executing their mandate and fulfilling their parties ideological pervue.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stopgeorge
Paper Ballots WORK. Unverifiable e-voting doesn't
309 Fans
05:45 PM on 02/08/2012
Ask the Chinese and the Corporations. They will dictate things now for us minions.
Permalink  |
photo
RKCharron
212 Fans
 
04:30 PM on 02/08/2012
"The act will differentiate between a commercial violation of copyright law and an individual violation. Individuals found violating the law could be liable for penalties between $100 and $5,000, which is below the current $20,000 maximum."
.....If this bill is enacted into law as it is written, many law-abiding citizens will suddenly be CRIMINALS and liable.

This bill is from the US and our government is pressured to pass it so the Corporations may eschew personal liberty and make more profit.
Permalink  |
Steven Whitehead
6 Fans
 
04:58 PM on 02/08/2012
Dont see how reducing the penalties for an illegal act will suddenly make citizens criminals. the act of downloading copyrighted materials was always illegal, the fines are now just more realistic.
Permalink  |
photo
RKCharron
212 Fans
 
05:03 PM on 02/08/2012
It's not the reducing of penalties but the other provisions, that, as written, will make what is currently legal illegal.
Permalink  |
photo
Mools
232 Fans
 
05:20 PM on 02/08/2012
If you read the bill, you will see the problems. You can't expect him to quote the entire bill. After that, it may be in violation.

I would also argue that lowering the fines means there is less burden of proof for a company to claim damages against individuals. In other words, you may be acting in what you believe is "fair use" and the corporation may claim you are violating the law and doing "damages" of, say, $200. You will be fined $200. That is what these lower individual fines are intended to do.

If you look at existing copyright case history, even if people are acting very strictly to the definition of "fair use", more often than not if corporations claim a violation they will win the court case. If fines are high, then there is more burden on the corporation to prove there is serious damages to them and that reduces the likelihood they will go around pressing charges against anyone they think is getting a free ride..."fair use" or not.
Permalink  |
photo
RKCharron
212 Fans
 
04:29 PM on 02/08/2012
"The act will require internet service providers to notify their customers that they are violating the copyright law if a copyright holder informs the ISP of possible piracy. The ISP is required to retain "relevant information" about the user such as their identity, and that information could potentially be released to the copyright holder with a court order."
.....The key phrase here is "possible piracy". A Corporation has to but make a charge of possible piracy against you.

"The act will exempt ISPs and search engines from liability for the copyright violations of their users if they are acting strictly as intermediaries in the hosting, caching or communication of copyrighted content."
.....Um. Yeah. So GOOGLE will be legal now? And it isn't already?

"The act will prohibit a person to provide a service over the internet or another digital network that the person "knows or should have known is designed primarily to enable acts of copyright infringement."
.....The key phrase here is "should have known" - which makes everyone a potential criminal who uses or provides any file sharing.
Permalink  |
photo
RKCharron
212 Fans
 
04:28 PM on 02/08/2012
"The act will allow librarians to digitize print material and send a copy electronically to users, who can view the material on a computer or print one copy."
.....I heartily endorse this. BUT, what if the user doesn't destroy/delete it and "BUILDS UP A LIBRARY"?

"The act will allow consumers who are disabled to adapt copyrighted material to a format they can more easily use."
.....Thank you for making it legal for someone who OWNS something to adapt it for themselves.

"The act will prohibit the manufacture, importation and sale of technologies, devices and services designed primarily for the purpose of breaking digital locks. This includes technology designed to allow you to play foreign-bought DVDs on your North American player, for example."
.....So if I want to watch a DVD which I OWN and that has a lock, and I circumvent the lock to watch it on another product which I OWN, I am now a CRIMINAL.

"The act will prohibit the circumventing of digital locks, even for legal purposes -- such as the education or satire uses protected by other sections of the Act."
.....Again, it is transferring the rights of THAT WHICH YOU HAVE PURCHASED AND HAVE IN YOUR POSSESSION to the Corporations.
Permalink  |
photo
Mools
232 Fans
 
05:07 PM on 02/08/2012
I think you hit the nail on the head here with your regional DVD comment. The Conservatives want to claim this is about protecting jobs? How is it protecting anyone's job if you buy a DVD from Best Buy, Amazon or some small import store downtown? Regardless of where the DVD comes from (ie. which region), the people who made the movie are getting your money. So who is this supposed to protect other than companies who have bought the distribution rights for north america?

In many cases, the people who make the movies also own the distribution of those movies, just under a different company name. It's part of why movies that make hundreds of millions supposedly "don't make a profit" (ie. Star Wars, Forrest Gump, etc). One corporation owning two separate parts of the chainw ith different sets of books. The distribution arm can charge whatever they want and the movie arm will approve it and voila! Suddenly a movie that made huge bank is in the hole. Accounting magic!

But what about the Weinstein company who owns the rights for TONS of foriegn movies but have zero intent of ever distributing them. Do they really deserve to be protected if I want to import my own copy and break the regional lock?
Permalink  |
photo
RKCharron
212 Fans
 
04:26 PM on 02/08/2012
"The act will allow Canadians to copy copyrighted material that is part of an online or distance learning course in order to listen to or view it at a later time. Under this provision, teachers can provide digital copies of copyrighted material to students as part of the course but only if they and the students destroy the course material within 30 days of the end of the course. Teachers are also expected to take reasonable measures to prevent the copying and distribution of the material other than for the purposes of the course. Critics have referred to this part of the Act as the "book burning" provisions."
.....So if a student doesn't destroy his or her course material he or she is now a CRIMINAL. Also the onus is on the teacher to make sure, so if a student has course material 32 days after the end of the course, the teacher may well be CHARGED as well as the student.
Permalink  |
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)