Moore has his facts wrong on copyright

OTTAWA – Minister James Moore’s attempts to paint opposition to his proposed copyright bill as “radical” and offside with Canada’s international trade obligations are just plain wrong. In a letter to the Minister of Industry and Minister Moore, New Democrat Digital Affairs Critic Charlie Angus (Timmins – James Bay) said the Conservatives are out of step with the international community and need to check their facts with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the trade body that deals with international copyright obligations.

“The digital lock provisions will subject Canadians to arbitrary limitations on their legal rights of access,” said Angus. “The government is trying to create the impression that this unbalanced approach to digital locks is necessary in order to bring Canada into compliance with WIPO and the Berne Convention. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

Angus pointed out that WIPO allows signatory countries enormous latitude for determining the limitations for digital locks. The Conservatives, however, are pushing a maximalist approach that would allow a digital lock on a DVD or an e-book to override any rights that would be normally guaranteed to citizens for access and extraction of works.
"The government is establishing a two-tiered set of rights. Bill C-32 offers rights that consumers will be restricted from exercising,” said Angus. “These provisions make a mockery of the claim that the bill is balanced and pro-consumer.”
Angus noted that many WIPO compliant countries have developed balanced copyright. He is calling on Moore to ask WIPO for an official opinion regarding the right of Canadians to break digital locks in order to legally access works that they otherwise have a right to access.

“Either the government has a faulty understanding of international treaty obligations or is looking to use these existing treaties as a cover to pursue a specific political agenda,” said Angus. “The New Democratic Party will challenge any provisions that would lead to unbalanced and arbitrary copyright legislation.”