• Home
  • About
  • Contact

James Wanless

designer :: collaborative technologist :: endorphin junkie

Journal Topics ⇒
  • design|
  • education|
  • reflection|
  • technology|
  • training & racing|

The real reason for C-61

June 16th, 2008 :: reflection :: comment below

American pressure is nothing if not intense. It starts with big business and media bending the ear of the Bush administration, who in turn, essentially forced Canada’s hand. Did we just become the 51st state? Sovereignty, anyone?

The following speaks for itself, courtesy Michael Geist:

The public campaign was obvious. U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins was outspoken on the copyright issue, characterizing Canadian copyright law as the weakest in the G7 (despite the World Economic Forum ranking it ahead of the U.S.). The U.S. Trade Representatives Office (USTR) made Canada a fixture on its Special 301 Watch list, an annual compilation of countries that the U.S. believes have sub-standard intellectual property laws. The full list contains nearly 50 countries accounting for 4.4 billion people or approximately 70 percent of the world’s population. Most prominently, last year U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein and John Cornyn, along with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, escalated the rhetoric on Canadian movie piracy, leading to legislative reform that took just three weeks to complete.

The private campaign was even more important. Sources say that emboldened by the successful campaign for anti-camcording legislation, U.S. officials upped the ante at the Security and Prosperity Partnership meeting in Montebello, Quebec last summer. Canadian officials arrived ready to talk about a series of economic concerns but were quickly rebuffed by their U.S. counterparts, who indicated that progress on other issues would depend upon action on the copyright file. Those demands were echoed earlier by the USTR, which, according to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, made veiled threats about “thickening the border” between Canada and the U.S. if Canada refused to put copyright reform on the legislative agenda.

Faced with unrelenting U.S. pressure, the newly installed Industry Minister was presented with a mandate letter that required a copyright bill that would meet U.S. approval. The government promised copyright reform in the October 2007 Speech from the Throne and was set to follow through last December, only to pull back at the last hour in the face of mounting public concern.

In the months that followed, Prentice’s next attempt to bring the copyright bill forward was stalled by internal cabinet concerns over how the bill would play out in public. The bill was then repackaged to include the new consumer-focused provisions such as the legalization of recording television shows and the new peer-to-peer download $500 damage award. The heart of the bill, however, remained largely unchanged since satisfying U.S. pressure remained priority number one. Just after 11:00 a.m. last Thursday, the U.S. got its Canadian copyright bill.

Share

  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • FriendFeed
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Ping.fm
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Identi.ca
  • StumbleUpon
  • Netvibes

2 comments

  1. Facebook in real life Says:

    July 15th, 2010 at 9:10 pm

    [...] The real reason for C-61 [...]

  2. Canned responses to C-61 letters Says:

    July 16th, 2010 at 12:31 am

    [...] The real reason for C-61 [...]

Leave a Reply

« « Help me understand C-61
Does tech make us stupid, or just rude? » »
  • Find something

  • Possibly related posts

    • Canned responses to C-61 letters
    • Facebook in real life
    • Digital rights and access under assault
  • Recent journal entries

    • Customizing menus and widgets for my new WordPress theme
    • Persona non grata in the United States of America
    • Vancouver Marathon half marathon race report
    • Rush: Beyond the lighted stage
    • February fitness in review

© James Wanless