ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> Michael Geist

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Copyright Law

: Michael Geist

61 Reforms to C-61, Day 52: Education Internet Exception Is Harmful

By Michael Geist

ADVERTISEMENTS
The Internet exception is more than just unnecessary - it is harmful.  First, rather than improving access, the exception will actually encourage people to take content offline or to erect barriers that limit access (including DRM).  Section 30.04(3) provides that:

Subsection (1) does not apply if the work or other subject-matter - or the Internet site where it is posted - is protected by a technological measure that restricts access to the work or other subject-matter or to the Internet site.

In other words, in return for the exception, CMEC and AUCC has effectively pushed the government to include a provision that encourages creators to use DRM or restrict access to their work. Many website owners who may be entirely comfortable with non-commercial or limited educational use of their materials, may object to a new law that grants the education community unfettered (and uncompensated) usage rights.  Accordingly, many sites may opt out of the exception by making their work unavailable to everyone.  This is obviously a lose-lose scenario that arises directly out of the exception.

Second, the implication of the exception is that using publicly-available Internet materials is not permitted unless one has prior authorization or qualifies for the exception.  This suggests that millions of Canadians outside the education system who use Internet-based materials are somehow violating the law.  This is simply wrong - an enormous amount of online content is intended for public use or qualifies as fair dealing - and to imply otherwise sends the wrong message.  Indeed, many of the concerns expressed by the education community apply equally to other groups who do not qualify for the exception.

Third, the exception may violate international law.  There are doubts that the provision complies with Canada’s existing obligations under the Berne Convention, the world's foremost international copyright treaty (ironic given that Bill C-61 is ostensibly about addressing international copyright issues).  Given that the exception raises these real harms, it should scrapped by moving toward a flexible fair dealing provision.

Full post as published by Michael Geist on September 02, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0241 secs (new cache)