It looks like the the Honourable [sic] Jim Prentice, Minister of Industry, and the Honourable Josée Verner, Minister of Canadian Heritage… will deliver brief statements and answer media inquiries shortly after the tabling of a bill to amend the Copyright Act. (official announcement link)

I distinctly recall this same bill being put on hold indefinitely once it became clear that public outcry would require a public consultation (link to ITWorld coverage). Now it seems that the consultation is over, and the bill is back on the floor TODAY. Boing Boing is rallying people to the cause once again, after joining many others in December to put Mr. Prentice in his place.

I too wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, Minister of Industry and my local MP Alexa McDonough. It explained that the innovative work at Stitch Media often redefines media boundaries and would be harmed by some of the overreaching areas of this DMCA-style bill. Neither Mr. Harper nor Mr. Prentice felt it was important enough to respond even via form letter.

Ms. McDonough – amidst announcements of her retirement from public office, was able to put together a thoughtful response which is reproduced here, partly to prove to myself that not everyone in the House is ignoring my letters but mostly to add to the public response to this ridiculous issue.

Thank you for writing to express your views with respect to proposed changes to the copyright legislation.

For more than two years, the Conservatives have been telling Canadians that a Bill with a balanced approach would be tabled ”shortly”, but it is now clear that Industry Minister Jim Prentice is under intense pressure from US interests to bring in DMCA-style legislation. What has delayed this bill is the groundswell of public opposition. Increased public pressure will be needed in order to push back against the US lobby.

The problem is that few politicians understand the implications of the failed DMCA approach. They need to hear from their constituents. It’s time for everyone who cares about fair copyright to drop their MP a line, or get on the phone, telling them that this issue is vote determining.

The NDP caucus will be standing united against a Canadian version of the DMCA, ensuring the government takes the perspective of everyday consumers, educators, and artists into account so that we don’t end up facing restrictive, destructive legislation.

I strongly believe that only a strong and united public outcry can reverse the government’s course on copyright. Your efforts, and those of others just like you, will not go unnoticed.

Thank you again for your interest in this issue.

Sincerely,

Alexa

UPDATE!

Four hours after this post went live – I received the following message from Prentice and Verner (from an official ic.gc.ca address). In the interests of completeness (and no doubt because they’d like to have their input on this blog as well), I will reproduce it here in its entirety.

The Government of Canada has introduced Bill C-61, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act. The proposed legislation is a made-in-Canada approach that balances the needs of Canadian consumers and copyright owners, promoting culture, innovation and competition in the digital age.

What does Bill C-61 mean to Canadians?

Specifically, it includes measures that would:

* expressly allow you to record TV shows for later viewing; copy legally purchased music onto other devices, such as MP3 players or cell phones; make back-up copies of legally purchased books, newspapers, videocassettes and photographs onto devices you own; and limit the “statutory damages” a court could award for all private use copyright infringements;

* implement new rights and protections for copyright holders, tailored to the Internet, to encourage participation in the online economy, as well as stronger legal remedies to address Internet piracy;

* clarify the roles and responsibilities of Internet Service Providers related to the copyright content flowing over their network facilities; and

* provide photographers with the same rights as other creators.

What Bill C-61 does not do:

* it would not empower border agents to seize your iPod or laptop at border crossings, contrary to recent public speculation

What this Bill is not:

* it is not a mirror image of U.S. copyright laws. Our Bill is made-in-Canada with different exceptions for educators, consumers and others and brings us into line with more than 60 countries including Japan, France, Germany and Australia

Bill C-61 was introduced in the Commons on June 12, 2008 by Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Heritage Minister Josée Verner.

For more information, please visit the Copyright Reform Process website at www.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/crp-prda.nsf/en/home

Thank you for sharing your views on this important matter.

The Honourable Jim Prentice, P.C., Q.C., M.P.
Minister of Industry

The Honourable Josée Verner, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women
and Official Languages and Minister for
La Francophonie

It looks like someone must be out there watching – so make sure to get your voices heard!

UPDATE!

If this blog post is going to be my only method of communicating directly with the advocates of this Bill, then I suppose I should outline some of the ways in which Stitch Media’s innovative work will be hindered by this new legislation. I am referring in my arguments to Michael Geist’s points on the Bill.

Stitch Media sets itself a mandate – to constantly push the boundaries of traditional media to find new definitions of entertainment. Part of this process is conducting internal R&D to create what is called a ‘proof of concept’. Some of the ideas we come up with sound downright impossible, and it’s only once we have a working version in our hands that we feel confident pitching it externally. These experiments never see the light of day until they become a part of a public project. This is about to become ILLEGAL in the proposed Bill C-61. There is no exception for tinkering with existing media or technology for R&D purposes – the act of tampering with a lock is illegal.

As an innovative company, we are required to sign international non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) all the time before meeting with clients. We are subject to ‘injunctive relief‘ as a company if we were to ever violate these agreements. Bill C-61 as we understand it, creates some unique circumstances where it is impossible for us to do our job securely and privately without using ‘banned’ technology to protect this confidential information.

It’s also come to our attention that instead of using Bill C-61 as the (albeit horrible) standard, we are actually going to be legally bound by each provider’s ‘Terms of Use’ (that legalese that many people blindly agree to during installations). Stitch Media will have to coordinate a policy for dealing with each source of copyright that has been arbitrarily assigned (and commonly not by the artist but some level of distribution). The legal consultation fees alone will be crushing.

Let me be clear – Stitch Media supports content creators and copyright holders. We believe you should all make a good living and not have your hard work stolen from you. Our point is that we are not the thieves – we’re trying to help open up new areas of innovation and want to take you along with us.

Finally, a link to a much more thorough analysis.

UPDATE!

This is possibly the most bizarre twist in the story. It looks like the Honourable [sic] Mr. Prentice is actually the first Canadian citizen to violate his own law. In an attack video on the Liberal government, which Mr. Prentice showcased during a press conference, the classic O’Jays track ‘For the Love of Money’ was featured WITHOUT the copyright holders’ permission.