At a holiday open house for his constituents in Calgary, Jim Prentice was bombarded with questions about his copyright bill that he will be tabling in the House of Commons soon. It is rumored that this bill will be a complete sell-out to US Government and Lobbyist demands.

When a member of the press asked who was asking for Canada’s copyright laws to be updated, the minister stated that CEOS had been pressuring him.

He avoided or provided very weak answers to the questions of the over 60 ordinary citizens who came out to ask him questions.

I only managed to get my question in at the last moment, asking him if he had consulted with any of the Canadian Artists or Songwriters who oppose the direction this piece of legislation is expected to go. He ignored my question.

Many Canadian artists have formed a group known as the Canadian Music Creators Coalition and they have been speaking out on this type of legislation. They want Canadians to be able to share music, and they don’t want to see their record companies sue their fans. They want to go after the people making profits off of their music illegally, but they don’t want to sue fans that are simply ripping music of their CDs and putting in on their iPod or sharing it with some friends.

The Songwriters Associaiton of Canada sees that Canadians prefer to access their music via file-sharing over other methods. They are suggesting a fee be collected from all ISP accounts, and then users can access their songs without fearing criminal prosecution. All views must be heard.

Jim Prentice states that all views will be heard, once the bill reaches committee level. Why wait until then? Prentice should not only be listening to the concerns of the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) when drafting the bill, but he should listen to all stakeholders (artists, songwriters and consumers.) Don’t waste parliament’s time by waiting until the bill has been tabled before consulting with all stakeholders.

It’s time for Jim Prentice to listen.

Now here’s what you can do:

Email:
Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca.

Snail Mail:
Jim Prentice

House of Commons
Parliament Buildings
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6 (you don’t need a stamp!)

Leave a message on Prentice’s voice-mail (As of 5:00PM today, all the voice mailboxes are full. Please try again on Monday… don’t let this die.)
Ottawa office - (613) 992-4275
Calgary office - (403) 216-7777
Minister office - (613) 995-9001

And don’t forget to write letters to the editor of your local newspapers.

Montreal—The Canadian Music Creators Coalition (CMCC) applauded the Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC) today for its innovative, forward-thinking proposal to provide Canadians with legal and affordable access to file-sharing services.

“This is the first progressive proposal we’ve seen in Canada to address file-sharing,” said Andrew Cash, CMCC spokesperson. “It’s telling that creators, the people who actually make the music being shared, are the people showing leadership and pushing for a made-in-Canada approach to file-sharing. We can only hope that the Canadian government will follow the Songwriters’ lead and begin exploring alternatives to the failed ‘locks, lawsuits and lobbying’ strategy of the major labels.”

The publication of the Songwriters’ proposal comes just days before the Government of Canada is expected to introduce copyright legislation, modeled on strict American laws. It’s anticipated that the new legislation will give rights-holders new rights over both music recordings and the digital tools, such as digital rights management (DRM), used to lock up that music.

“We don’t know if the Songwriters have all the answers,” states CMCC member Steven Page, “but we do know that this proposal moves in the right direction. The Songwriters’ proposal offers tremendous value to both consumers and rights-holders. The Songwriters have given us the framework to come together to talk about digital music. The CMCC wholeheartedly endorses the Songwriters’ efforts, and looks forward to joining all Canadian stakeholders in considering the merits of this proposal.”

Full text of the SAC proposal may be found here.

Highlights from the SAC proposal:

• We define Music File Sharing as the sharing of a copy of a copyrighted musical work without motive of financial gain.Since the new right is limited to activities that take place without motive of financial gain, parties who receive compensation for file sharing would not be covered by this right. Therefore, this new right is distinct from rights licensed by legal music sites like iTunes and PureTracks.
• The new right would make it legal to share music between two or more parties, whether over Peer to Peer networks, wireless networks, email, CD, DVD, hard drives etc. Distinct from private copying, this new right would authorize the sharing of music with other individuals.
• In exchange for this sharing of their work, Creators and rights holders would be entitled to receive a monthly license fee from each internet and wireless account in Canada.
• We propose a licence fee of $5.00 per internet subscription, per month. Payment of this fee would remove the stigma of illegality from file sharing. In addition, it would represent excellent value to the consumer, since this fee would grant access to the majority of the world’s repertoire of music. Existing download subscription services generally charge considerably more than $5.00 per month, while offering a mere fraction of the file-sharing repertoire

If you agree with Canadian Musicians and Songwriters, and not with the record companies, please sign the petition located here.

The Canadian Music Creators Coalition (CMCC) renewed its calls for the Canadian government to ensure a made-in-Canada response to copyright reform. This call comes in the wake of the landmark judgment October 4 against Jammie Thomas, the single mother of two from Brainerd, MN who was hit with a penalty of $222,000 US for downloading 24 songs (approximately 90 minutes of music with a retail value of less than $25) and the Federal Government’s addition of “copyright reform” to it’s list of priorities in last week’s throne speech. “When the Canadian Record Industry Association (CRIA) says ‘copyright reform’ what they really mean is ‘give a free hand to sue fans who download like they have in the US,’” explained CMCC representative and Barenaked Ladies front man Steven Page. “We hope the government has a better solution in mind.”

“We think lawsuits like the one in Minnesota would be terrible for the music business in Canada. It’s shortsighted to say ‘See you in court’ one day and ‘See you at Massey Hall’ the next,” Page continued. “If record labels want to try and sue fans, we hope that they’ll have the courtesy to stop trying to do it in our names.”

The CMCC suggests a more effective legislative approach to peer-to-peer technology would be one that accepts current technological and music-business realities.

“It’s been nearly ten years since peer-to-peer file sharing changed the music industry and, despite what some people suggest, suing people isn’t going to make it 1995 again,” Page elaborated. “Capitol Records v. Thomas is just another example of the drastic measures American record labels have been taking against their fans for years. Despite all this ill will, peer-to-peer downloading hasn’t shown any sign of going away. If the Canadian government wants to reform copyright it should be creating a made-in-Canada solution that looks to where the music industry is going, not where it was.”

Two McLean High School students have launched a court challenge against a California company hired by their school to catch cheaters, claiming the anti-plagiarism service violates copyright laws.

The lawsuit, filed this week in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, seeks $900,000 in damages from the for-profit service known as Turnitin. The service seeks to root out cheaters by comparing student term papers and essays against a database of more than 22 million student papers as well as online sources and electronic archives of journals. In the process, the student papers are added to the database.

“All of these kids are essentially straight-A students, and they have no interest in plagiarizing,” said Robert A. Vanderhye, a McLean attorney representing the students pro bono. “The problem with [Turnitin] is the archiving of the documents. They are violating a right these students have to be in control of their own property.”

Washington Post

Interesting. I’d like to see how the judge rules on this. The students own the work, yet someone else is taking it and making a profit out of it without permission. I hope the school doesn’t side with the company providing this service. I believe in copyright, but I think it needs to be reformed to protect the creators more and the consumers, when applicable. Right now copyright is written for publishing and record companies, which is why I wouldn’t be completely surprised if these students lose.

Thanks to Blast Furnace Canada for bringing this story to my attention.