Feb 22nd 2012, 15:21:40
So I sent some emails out and they actually responded?
\\\Thank you for taking the time to write regarding Bill C-11, An Act to amend
the Copyright Act. We appreciate having the benefit of your comments and the
opportunity to let you know more about our work on a number of these
legislative concerns.
New Democrats want updated copyright laws to balance the rights of artists,
consumers and rights-holders. We believe that Canada needs effective
legislation to ensure artists’ royalties are protected; long-distance
education opportunities aren’t hindered; and that young people aren’t
subject to unfair, expensive fines.
That’s why we will not be supporting Bill C-11 unless the government is
willing to amend the digital lock provisions and restore royalty provisions
for artists. The blanket provisions for digital locks will allow corporate
interests to decide what legal rights you may or may not exercise. This
unbalanced approach will ultimately hurt artists, educators and consumers.
New Democrats also think that it is time to strike a balance in Canada’s
copyright law that will properly recognize the cultural community for its
valuable contributions to our society. Going forward, we will continue to
work hard to improve this bill and press the Harper government to adopt the
best copyright laws for the 21st century.
Please find below a letter from NDP Copyright and Digital Issues critic
Charlie Angus that further explains our position on Bill C-11.
Again, thank you for taking the time to register your views.
Sincerely,
Nycole Turmel, M.P.
Interim Leader of the Official Opposition
New Democratic Party of Canada
Charlie Angus, M.P.
NDP Copyright and Digital Issues Critic
Thank you for your email regarding C-11, the Conservative government’s new
copyright bill. Since 2004, New Democrats have pushed to have Canada’s
copyright legislation brought into the digital age.
We believe that copyright in a digital environment must be based on two
fundamental principles – access for consumers and remuneration for artists.
Unfortunately, the Conservative government has failed to meet these two
fundamental principles. On one hand, the government directly attacks
millions of dollars in existing copyright royalty to artists all the while
undermining rights of consumers through their digital lock provisions.
Given the above, we will not be supporting Bill C-11 unless the government
is willing to amend the digital lock provisions and restore royalty
provisions for artists.
New Democrats are concerned about a number of measures in this legislation.
First, we oppose the digital lock provisions in Bill C-11 as they go well
beyond our obligations under the WIPO treaty. Legal protection for TPMs
(Technological Protection Measures) should not override rights that are
guaranteed to citizens under existing copyright legislation.
Another concern is that this bill offers consumers rights they will not be
able to exercise. The blanket provisions for digital locks will allow
corporate interests to decide what legal rights you may or may not exercise.
This unbalanced approach will ultimately hurt artists, educators and
consumers.
There are also serious concerns over the impact this bill would have on
long-distance education. In particular, we are totally opposed to provisions
that would require students and educators to destroy their class notes after
30 days.
While we support the right of consumers to time shift and back up legal
works, we oppose the government’s attempt to erase the right of artists to
receive compensation for private copying of works. Further, the refusal of
the government to update the private copying levy into the digital realm
will cost artists millions of dollars a year in lost royalties.
Finally, we oppose plans to remove mechanical royalties for radio as well as
attempts to erase collective licensing rights in schools.
While there is much we dislike in this bill, there are measures that we can
support — for example, provisions that would bring Canada into compliance
with the WIPO copyright treaties including the “making available” right of
artists. We also support the move to ensure photographers are given
copyright over their works. We support efforts to extend fair dealing rights
for satire and parody.
For our part, we will try to improve this deeply flawed piece of
legislation. First, we will look to amend the digital lock provisions to
ensure there is a balance between the right of a creator to protect their
work and the right of the consumer to access content for which they are
legally entitled.
In addition, we are committed to clarifying the fair dealing rights in terms
of education so that students and educators are able to access works in the
classroom while, at the same time, ensuring collective licensing regimes for
the fair remuneration of creators are not undermined.
Again, I appreciate knowing of your interest to have Canada adopt improved
copyright legislation for the 21st century.
Sincerely,
Charlie Angus, MP Timmins – James Bay
Official Opposition Critic for Digital Issues and Copyright
\\\Thank you for taking the time to write regarding Bill C-11, An Act to amend
the Copyright Act. We appreciate having the benefit of your comments and the
opportunity to let you know more about our work on a number of these
legislative concerns.
New Democrats want updated copyright laws to balance the rights of artists,
consumers and rights-holders. We believe that Canada needs effective
legislation to ensure artists’ royalties are protected; long-distance
education opportunities aren’t hindered; and that young people aren’t
subject to unfair, expensive fines.
That’s why we will not be supporting Bill C-11 unless the government is
willing to amend the digital lock provisions and restore royalty provisions
for artists. The blanket provisions for digital locks will allow corporate
interests to decide what legal rights you may or may not exercise. This
unbalanced approach will ultimately hurt artists, educators and consumers.
New Democrats also think that it is time to strike a balance in Canada’s
copyright law that will properly recognize the cultural community for its
valuable contributions to our society. Going forward, we will continue to
work hard to improve this bill and press the Harper government to adopt the
best copyright laws for the 21st century.
Please find below a letter from NDP Copyright and Digital Issues critic
Charlie Angus that further explains our position on Bill C-11.
Again, thank you for taking the time to register your views.
Sincerely,
Nycole Turmel, M.P.
Interim Leader of the Official Opposition
New Democratic Party of Canada
Charlie Angus, M.P.
NDP Copyright and Digital Issues Critic
Thank you for your email regarding C-11, the Conservative government’s new
copyright bill. Since 2004, New Democrats have pushed to have Canada’s
copyright legislation brought into the digital age.
We believe that copyright in a digital environment must be based on two
fundamental principles – access for consumers and remuneration for artists.
Unfortunately, the Conservative government has failed to meet these two
fundamental principles. On one hand, the government directly attacks
millions of dollars in existing copyright royalty to artists all the while
undermining rights of consumers through their digital lock provisions.
Given the above, we will not be supporting Bill C-11 unless the government
is willing to amend the digital lock provisions and restore royalty
provisions for artists.
New Democrats are concerned about a number of measures in this legislation.
First, we oppose the digital lock provisions in Bill C-11 as they go well
beyond our obligations under the WIPO treaty. Legal protection for TPMs
(Technological Protection Measures) should not override rights that are
guaranteed to citizens under existing copyright legislation.
Another concern is that this bill offers consumers rights they will not be
able to exercise. The blanket provisions for digital locks will allow
corporate interests to decide what legal rights you may or may not exercise.
This unbalanced approach will ultimately hurt artists, educators and
consumers.
There are also serious concerns over the impact this bill would have on
long-distance education. In particular, we are totally opposed to provisions
that would require students and educators to destroy their class notes after
30 days.
While we support the right of consumers to time shift and back up legal
works, we oppose the government’s attempt to erase the right of artists to
receive compensation for private copying of works. Further, the refusal of
the government to update the private copying levy into the digital realm
will cost artists millions of dollars a year in lost royalties.
Finally, we oppose plans to remove mechanical royalties for radio as well as
attempts to erase collective licensing rights in schools.
While there is much we dislike in this bill, there are measures that we can
support — for example, provisions that would bring Canada into compliance
with the WIPO copyright treaties including the “making available” right of
artists. We also support the move to ensure photographers are given
copyright over their works. We support efforts to extend fair dealing rights
for satire and parody.
For our part, we will try to improve this deeply flawed piece of
legislation. First, we will look to amend the digital lock provisions to
ensure there is a balance between the right of a creator to protect their
work and the right of the consumer to access content for which they are
legally entitled.
In addition, we are committed to clarifying the fair dealing rights in terms
of education so that students and educators are able to access works in the
classroom while, at the same time, ensuring collective licensing regimes for
the fair remuneration of creators are not undermined.
Again, I appreciate knowing of your interest to have Canada adopt improved
copyright legislation for the 21st century.
Sincerely,
Charlie Angus, MP Timmins – James Bay
Official Opposition Critic for Digital Issues and Copyright
Originally posted by NOW3P:
Religion is like a penis - it's perfectly fine to have one, but you're best served not whipping it out in public and waving it in people's faces.