Welcome to the website of the Creators' Copyright Coalition. We at the CCC are committed to access to our creative works just as we are committed to copyright: we work for copyright legislation that ensures both. Here on our op-ed pages we will be posting opinion, commentary, links, and news of interest to creators and others engaged in copyright reform. Elsewhere, you'll find our archive of studies, handbooks and press releases. And while we're not currently hosting a discussion forum, comments sent to us may be posted or noted here (unless you ask us not to).

Guardian online: Levine on copyright

By Op-Ed Editor | August 15, 2011

As Britain contemplates changes in copyright reform, The Guardian Online publishes the view of Robert Levine, author of Free Ride:

although the internet has expanded the audience for media, it has all but destroyed the market for it.

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

CCC Press Release, June 7, 2001

By Op-Ed Editor | June 7, 2011

For Immediate Release

Creators Set out Principles for Effective Copyright Reform: “Legislation built on these core principles will benefit both creators and users”

Toronto – June 7, 2011 – As the new government gets down to the business of governing, a group representing more than 100,000 professional creators has laid out key principles and suggestions to guide the government as it prepares new copyright legislation. The practical ideas being offered will help unleash the full creative and economic potential of Canadian artists, writers, photographers, visual artists, screenwriters, directors, composers, musicians and performers.

“We know that new copyright legislation is a top priority for the new government, and that’s great news for creators,” said Bill Freeman, Chair of The Creators’ Copyright Coalition (CCC), which prepared the statement. “We are committed to working with the government to create a new bill that allows creators to contribute as much as we can to our economy.”

The CCC has reached out to Heritage Minister James Moore and Industry Minister Christian Paradis and opposition critics with a ‘guiding principles’ paper and an offer to meet and work co-operatively with them as they write new legislation. Principles outlined in the paper include:

• Payment for use of copyright material
• “Hand-outs” must not replace legal rights
• Collective rights management is good for both creators and consumers
• Collective licensing and tariffs, supervised by the Copyright Board, are a better solution than exceptions from copyright infringement
• Copyright laws must be clear in order to avoid excessive litigation; and
• There must be effective and equitable remedies against content theft
“Legislation built on these core principles will benefit both creators and users,” said Freeman. “The end goal is to get clear laws in place that allow users to access our work while ensuring creators get paid for use so we can continue innovating and contributing to Canada’s digital economy.”

The complete document and list of proposals can be found below at this site.

About the Creators’ Copyright Coalition

The Creators’ Copyright Coalition is an alliance of national associations, unions and collectives representing individual artists working primarily in the English language media in Canada. The CCC includes the following organizations:
Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
Canadian Actors’ Equity Association (Equity)
Canadian Artists Representation (CARFAC)
Canadian Artists Representation Copyright Collective (CARCC)
Canadian Federation of Musicians (CFM)
Canadian Music Centre
Canadian League of Composers
Directors Guild of Canada
League of Canadian Poets
The Literary Translators Association of Canada
Playwrights Guild of Canada
Professional Writers Association of Canada (PWAC)
Screen Composers Guild of Canada (SCGC)
Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC)
Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN)
Writers Guild of Canada (WGC)
The Writers’ Union of Canada (TWUC)
-30-
Media Contacts: Bill Freeman, Chair CCC, 416-203-2956, Email: billfreeman@rogers.com
David Kinahan, Writers Guild of Canada, email: d.kinahan@wgc.ca

The Creators’ Copyright Coalition
c/o The Writers’ Union of Canada
90 Richmond Street East, 2nd floor
Toronto, Ontario . M5C 1P1
www.creatorscopyright.ca

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

A Copyright Bill for the Creative Digital Economy: A CCC Statement

By Op-Ed Editor |

Revisions to the Copyright Act are essential to Canada’s digital economy strategy as incentive to move the creative economy forward, and also to satisfy demands by its trading partners that Canada implement the WIPO “Internet Treaties”. Bill C-32, which died with the election call, included many new exceptions from infringement and some confusing language that would have led to costly litigation. It was clear that many proposed changes, some unintentionally, eroded creators’ rights.

Arts and culture industries provide over 630,000 jobs and contribute $46 billion to Canada’s economy. Copyright revision should be supportive of these industries, big and small, and encourage their growth. The works of creators are the foundation of all such industries. A bill like C-32 would make it significantly more difficult for creators to carry on their copyright-reliant businesses, cause them significant income losses, and be a real barrier to the continuing growth of Canadian digital content and Canada’s digital economy.

While recognizing the pressures on the Government from various stakeholders, we, the Creators Copyright Coalition, urge the Government to pay attention to the needs of Canadian creators as it prepares an improved piece of legislation that will support the digital economy.

Core Principles

Here are the core principles that we believe should shape new copyright legislation:
• Payment for use. In the Bill C-32 debate, virtually everyone agreed with this principle, but the bill contained provisions that would have removed some payments that creators now receive.
• “Hand-outs” must not replace legal rights. A system of grants for individual creators helps some, but all creators need predictable incomes based on business models that are supported by copyright. The primary principle that should guide copyright law is “payment for use”.
• Collective rights management is good for creators and consumers. It is often impracticable or impossible for creators as individuals to grant licences and to collect payment. By inserting a myriad of new exceptions, Bill C-32 would have weakened the management of rights by collective societies – removing some rights that are currently collectively administered and pre-empting other opportunities before creators could develop business models for new digital uses. An improved bill should reverse Bill C-32’s trend away from collective management.
• Collective licensing and tariffs, supervised by the Copyright Board, are a better solution than exceptions from copyright infringement. Collective management gives users the same easy access to copyright works as exceptions do, with the advantage that access can be broader and more flexible, and it also provides reasonable payment to the creators whose work is used.
• Copyright laws must be clear in order to avoid excessive litigation. The imprecision of some provisions in C-32 would have led to frequent and costly litigation, most notably to determine the meaning of “fair dealing” for education. We recognize that there will always be legal challenges to new measures, but clarity of language is essential.
• There must be effective remedies against pirating. The effect of pirating on the music industry is well known. Movies, documentary films and other audiovisual works are also widely “shared” electronically, and as electronic books increase their market share, they have become vulnerable to illegal copying and sharing. Infringements are causing greater harm to more and more creators. Copyright law must provide penalties that are equitable yet sufficient to deter infringers, including non-commercial infringers, both big non-profit users and individuals whose minor infringements may cumulatively damage a work’s market.

New copyright legislation must support the above principles in order for creators to contribute as much as possible to the digital economy – enriching Canada economically and providing social and cultural wellsprings for the future.

The way to a better piece of legislation

We offer some practical suggestions to remedy the defects of the previously proposed revision to the Copyright Act:
• Introduce the 3-step test based on the Berne Convention to help interpret exceptions in Part III.
• Expand and strengthen collective management in order to increase inexpensive and easy access for consumers to works that are protected by copyright. Ensure that income continues to flow to creators, regardless of how digital media develop, through licensing, tariffs, levies or new mechanisms.
o Ensure that the communication of user-generated content to the public on the Internet does not conflict with creators’ economic and moral rights.
o Implement a regime that provides payment for any private uses of works, with royalties collected and distributed through collective societies.
o Provide payment for private copying of sound recordings of music irrespective of the technology used.
• Maintain the Copyright Act’s existing remedies, including statutory damages, for non-commercial as well as commercial infringements.
• Remove the proposed fair dealing exception for education.
• Implement a “graduated response” or another collaborative system in co-operation with ISPs.
• Identify the authors of an audiovisual work as its screenwriter(s) and director.
• Introduce the resale right for visual artists.

The Works of Creators in the Digital World

We are ready and willing to work with the Government to modernize Canada’s Copyright Act in ways that allow creators to prosper and build businesses that will continue to flourish and contribute to the Canadian economy. This would benefit creators and consumers and be an essential part of the strategy needed to make Canada a leader in the new digital economy.

Creators Copyright Coalition – June 6, 2011

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

Creators Speak Out Against Copyright Bill: C-32 Reforms Shut Us Out of Digital Economy

By Op-Ed Editor | December 6, 2010

For Immediate Release

Toronto – December 6, 2010 – Proposed reforms to Canada’s copyright law will turn core principles of copyright on their head and gut protections that for decades helped ensure the economic survival of Canadian artists, writers, photographers, visual artists, directors, composers, musicians and performers, a group representing more than 100,000 professional creators said in a paper released today.

“As MPs scrutinize C-32 in Committee they have to bear in mind that modernization of copyright for the digital age must not be allowed to shut creators out,” said Bill Freeman, Chair of The Creators’ Copyright Coalition (CCC), which prepared the statement. “But that’s exactly what C-32 will do.”

“It’s rare for arts groups to be unanimous in their views and to speak with a united voice,” Marvin Dolgay, a music composer and President of the Screen Composers Guild of Canada, said. “We are 16 major arts groups representing a massive number of professionals in virtually every sector. To come together on this issue like this shows we mean business. We mean business, because our business is at risk.”

Canada needs stronger collective licensing, not the weakening of protections for creators that C-32 proposes, the CCC paper argues. (The full CCC paper is below.)

The Creators’ Copyright Coalition supports the modernization of copyright and the encouragement of greater access to creators’ works – but access for use and re-use of creative works must be compensated. The introduction of numerous broad exceptions for education and private purposes, and the refusal to adapt the private copying regime to a technology-neutral system that strengthens collective licensing, will shut Canadian artists out of the digital economy.

“Creators depend on a range of revenue streams for their economic survival,” Mr. Freeman said, “and C-32 would eliminate a number of those revenue streams. Fair copyright legislation should give the public access to the works of creators in exchange for fair compensation. That principle is even more important in the evolving digital economy so creators can develop new business models that ensure that they are fairly compensated when their works are used – vital to them continuing to create,” Mr. Freeman added.

The CCC proposes six changes to proposed reforms that disadvantage Canadian creators. These include the Bill’s provisions for reproduction for ‘private purposes,’ user-generated content, exceptions for education, statutory damages, Internet Service Provider (ISP) liability and the weakening of collective licensing mechanisms.

“Parliament must change these legislative plans,” actor Wendy Crewson said. “It must encourage – not discourage – the essential investments that Canadian musicians, composers, authors, poets, playwrights, artists, screenwriters and performers make and that will keep our digital economy healthy and productive. C-32 is flawed by a poor understanding of the structure of Canada’s creative industries,” continued Crewson.

About The Creators’ Copyright Coalition

The Creators’ Copyright Coalition is an alliance of national associations, unions and collectives representing individual artists working primarily in the English language media in Canada. The CCC includes the following organizations:

Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
Canadian Actors’ Equity Association (Equity)
Canadian Artists Representation (CARFAC)
Canadian Artists Representation Copyright Collective (CARCC)
Canadian Federation of Musicians (CFM)
Canadian Music Centre
Canadian League of Composers
Directors Guild of Canada
League of Canadian Poets
The Literary Translators Association of Canada
Playwrights Guild of Canada
Professional Writers Association of Canada (PWAC)
Screen Composers Guild of Canada (SCGC)
Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC)
Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN)
Writers Guild of Canada (WGC)
The Writers’ Union of Canada (TWUC)

-30-

Media Contact:

The following creators have made themselves available for one-on-one interviews with the media. To arrange an interview please contact John Provenzano at 416-868-1620 ext. 292 or by email at action@copyrightgetitright.ca

Phyllis Aronoff is a literary translator from French to English. She has translated fiction, non-fiction and poetry by French and Canadian authors. Her translations have won the Quebec Writers Federation Prize and the Jewish Book Award and have been shortlisted for the Governor General’s Literary Award and other prizes. Phyllis lives in Montreal.

Gerald Beaulieu was born in Welland, Ontario in 1964. He studied art at the Ontario College of Art and Design including a final year of study at the New York City satellite campus. He is primarily a sculptor and installation artist. He has had exhibitions across the country. Gerald works and lives on Prince Edward Island.

Douglas Arthur Brown is the author of five books including the award-winning novel Quintet. He has also written short stories and plays. In 2009 he won the Nova Scotia Established Artist Recognition Award and has won the Thomas Head Raddall Atlantic Fiction Prize. Douglas lives at the Bras d’Or Lake in Cape Breton.

Alan Cumyn’s fiction for adults focuses on personal and political relations and his fiction for children explores the often humorous struggles of the inner world. He is the winner of the Mr. Christie’s Book Award, the Silver Birch Express Award, and the Ottawa Book Award and has been a finalist for The Giller Prize and the Trillium Award. Alan lives in Ottawa.

Bill Freeman is the Chair of the Creators’ Copyright Coalition and the author of numerous books, plays, travel features and film scripts including an award-winning series of historical fiction adventures for young adults set in Canada in the 1870s. He is a winner of many awards including the Vicky Metcalf Award for Children’s Literature and the Canada Council Award for Juvenile Literature. Bill lives on Toronto Island.

Paul Hoffert is a recording artist, performer, music composer, and author of bestselling books, as well as the Chair of the Screen Composers Guild of Canada, the Bell Broadcast and New Media Fund, and the Glenn Gould Foundation Inc. He has won numerous awards including the Pixel award as the New Media industry’s “Visionary” in 2002, four Juno awards, San Francisco Film Festival Award, SOCAN Film Composer Award and the “Order of Canada” in 2005 for his contributions to music and media. The Financial Post described him as a “New Mandarin” along with Bill Gates and the Toronto Star characterized him as the “ideal visionary for the Digital Age.” Paul lives in Toronto.

Greg Hollingshead is the author of six books. He is a winner of the Governor General’s Award for Fiction and the Rogers Writers’ Trust Fiction Prize, has been a finalist for The Giller Prize, and is a recipient of the Lieutenant Governor of Alberta Gold Medal for Excellence in the Arts. Greg lives in Edmonton.

Denis McGrath is a Gemini-Award nominated screenwriter. He has written on such television series as The Border, Stargate: Universe, Less Than Kind and the upcoming XIII. He also co-created the series Across the River to Motor City, for which he won a Writers Guild of Canada Screenwriting Award. Denis lives in Toronto.

Eddie Schwartz is an award winning Canadian songwriter and producer. Best known for writing the smash Pat Benetar song, “Hit me with your best shot”, Schwartz has also penned tunes for greats such as the Doobie Brothers, Paul Carrack, Joe Cocker, Peter Frampton, Carly Simon, Rita Coolidge, Rascall Flatts, April Wine and Amy Sky. His worldwide sales are currently in excess of 30 million recordings. Eddie lives in Nashville and Haliburton.

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

The CCC Position on Bill C-32, the Copyright Modernization Act

By admin |

December 6, 2010

THE POSITION PAPER OF THE CREATORS’ COPYRIGHT COALITION:

Who We Are

The Creators Copyright Coalition (CCC) is an alliance of 16 professional associations of individual
creators, and copyright collective societies active in theatre, visual arts, applied arts, literature, music, recording and audiovisual sectors (radio, television, film, digital media and commercials).Together we represent more than 100,000 professional creators who are the first owners of copyright and neighbouring rights. This paper reflects the common position of CCC members on Bill C-32. The individual members making up the CCC (as listed below) may provide their own respective submissions on the Bill and copyright reform as part of the Committee review process now underway.

Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
Canadian Federation of Musicians (CFM)
Canadian Actors’ Equity Association (Equity)
Canadian Artists Representation (CARFAC)
Canadian Artists Representation Copyright Collective (CARCC)
Canadian Music Centre
Screen Composers Guild of Canada (SCGC)
Directors Guild of Canada
League of Canadian Poets
Literary Translators Association of Canada
Playwrights Guild of Canada
Professional Writers Association of Canada (PWAC)
Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC)
Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN)
Writers Guild of Canada (WGC)
The Writers’ Union of Canada (TWUC)

Introduction

“As the creators of Flashpoint, we are pleased that audiences want to see and share our work. And we believe they want to see us paid so we can keep creating.”
Mark Ellis and Stephanie Morgenstern, screenwriters

“I want my fans to have access to my music, and I want to be compensated for that access. That’s the point of being a professional creator. But as new media distribution and platforms replace historic ones, the creator’s ability to make even a modest living is being seriously eroded. There must be an acknowledgement that our work has value to the consumer and to society.”
Marvin Dolgay, composer, President, Screen Composers Guild of Canada

“Copyright legislation is supposed to protect the rights of creators. But C-32 does just the opposite. Most alarming, the proposed new “education” exception under “fair dealing” promises endless costly litigation. What’s ‘fair’ about a cost saving for schools that eats into the incomes of writers?”
Alan Cumyn, novelist, Chair, The Writers’ Union of Canada

“Content creation is at the heart of a thriving digital economy. If our Canadian cultural industries are to keep producing films, TV programs, video games, we need to find compromises that balance the interests of Canadians who consume our works with the reality that creators can’t work for free. “
Yannick Bisson, actor, star of Murdoch Mysteries

Bill C-32 proposes, in many unprecedented respects, to weaken both copyright and the collective licensing mechanisms upon which the livelihoods of Canadian professional creators rely. The Bill, if passed into law without revision, threatens to marginalize creators. C-32 dismisses the importance of revenues from secondary markets for a creator’s work and will seriously erode existing incomes by taking these away. Indeed, the Government’s introduction of numerous broad exceptions and the failure to adapt the private copying regime to present and future technologies, or to strengthen
collective licensing to give both ease of access to cultural works to consumers and appropriate remuneration to creators, foreshadow a Canadian digital economy in which many creators are seriously disadvantaged, or worse, left behind. This prospect is, of course, entirely inconsistent with the Government’s stated digital economy policy objectives to engage with creators and to drive innovation.

While many of the proposed new exceptions in the Bill are meant to modernize consumers’ access and use of copyright-protected works, the Bill contains little to ensure that creators of those works receive appropriate compensation. The Government’s legislative plan has to change if the essential investments that Canadian musicians, composers and lyricists, book and magazine writers, poets, playwrights, screenwriters, visual artists and other authors and performers need to make in our digital economy are to be encouraged. C-32 must be amended to make it truly technology neutral and so that, without hardship to consumers, Canada’s creators suffer no hardship either. In a nutshell, the CCC believes that collective licensing is the way to achieve this balance while helping to build Canada’s digital economy.

The CCC is also concerned that Bill C-32 introduces a plethora of exceptions into Canadian copyright law, especially vague ones like fair dealing for the purpose of “education”. Without clarity and conformity with the ‘Berne three-step test’, such exceptions appear destined to invite litigation and to put Canada offside with its international treaty obligations. To avoid such eventuality, the CCC believes the Bill should be amended to include the following interpretive provision: “In interpreting limitations or exceptions to copyright under Part III of the Act, the court shall ensure that such limitations or exceptions are confined to certain special cases, do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work, and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author, including the author’s right to equitable remuneration.” Any exception the Government proposes to add to the Act through Bill C-32 needs to meet this basic international standard, of course.

This position paper provides the CCC’s non-exhaustive analysis of six major issues raised by the Bill that affect the creators its member organizations represent. Where appropriate, the CCC’s recommendations for amendment or solutions to these issues are provided.

Six Solutions for Six Issues

Issue #1 – Reproduction for Private Purposes

Bill C-32 proposes to grant to consumers new private copying rights at the expense of creators. Creators want consumers to have an expanded ability to legally copy works of all types in a wide varietyof formats and to a wide variety of storage devices, provided that appropriate compensation is provided to creators. The scope of the new exception also undercuts existing primary revenues of creators by expanding legal copying to such an extent as to impact sales of original works. By creating this very broad exception without also providing for a royalty stream to creators, Bill C-32 has failed to provide a balanced approach to copyright.

A model for appropriate remuneration of private copying of copyright works is found in Part VIII (Private Copying) of the Copyright Act. Over the past decade recorded music rights-holders have been paid a royalty in respect of private copies made by individuals onto blank audio recording media. This private copying regime reflects the fact that such copies have value to users, and that fair remuneration for that value, as determined by the Copyright Board of Canada, is essential to the livelihood and work of creators. However, the media to which the regime currently applies – for example CDs — are rapidly becoming obsolete. While Bill C-32 purports to be “technologically neutral”, it does not provide for much needed expansion and updating of the private copying regime to allow for the new technologies that consumers use to copy works for private use in the same way that the proposed Reproduction for Private Purposes would.

The proposed exception will pre-emptively eliminate sources of private copying revenue for recorded music and reduce or cut off current and potential revenue streams available to creators of all types of works.

Solution

The existing private copying regime applicable to sound recording media such as blank CDs is an integral part of the Copyright Act. It must be extended so that it also applies to digital audio recorders in order to be technology neutral.

The Government should encourage greater access to cultural works and appropriate compensation for creators. To maintain the balance between consumers and creators, copyright law must build on existing collective licensing and levies and develop new ones so that income flows to artists regardless of how digital media develop. Reproduction for Private Purposes must be balanced by a copyright levy to compensate creators of all types of works for private copying to any personal device or medium ordinarily used by consumers.

Issue #2 – User-Generated Content (UGC)

Bill C-32 proposes to shrink existing and potential markets for creators, cutting off revenue flowing to creators and copyright owners, all the while rewarding commercial intermediaries. The Bill stands to introduce a ’mash-up‘ exception which would permit consumers to use existing copyright-protected works to create new works, which can be disseminated through an intermediary. Should this
exception become law it will be at the expense of rights-holders of existing copyright-protected works and largely to the financial benefit of commercial intermediaries such as YouTube. Because this proposed provision conflicts with rights-holders’ normal exploitation of their existing copyright-protected works, it runs afoul of the Berne three- step test and Canada’s international treaty obligations.

Solution

Remove the UGC provision. So as to ensure that creators of existing works rightfully benefit from this manner of exploitation, any future UGC provision should make UGC works subject to “fairness” criteria and collective licensing.

Issue #3 – Fair Dealing and other Exceptions for Education

The proposed expansion of fair dealing to include ‘education’ – and the addition of many more exceptions for educational purposes – subsidizes education at the expense of creators. Educational institutions pay the full cost of desks, computers and teacher salaries, why would they not pay for content valuable enough to use in teaching? Copyright material should not be free simply because it is used in schools – Bill C-32 unfairly discriminates against content creators. The addition of ill-defined exceptions will create legal uncertainty, increasing the potential for litigation. Furthermore it is not at all clear how the addition of “education” would not lead to conflict with already existing licensing arrangements and other normal exploitations of works, all in violation of Canada’s international obligations. The same applies, for example, to the Bill’s proposed replacement of sections 30.2(4) and (5) of the Act, which would remove the ability of collective societies to license the digital delivery of copyright-protected material by libraries, archives and museums to patrons.

Solution

Amend Bill C-32 to ensure that creators receive fair compensation for the use of their works. All new exceptions need to comply with the Berne three-step test.

Issue #4 – Statutory Damages

The Bill proposes to drastically reduce the statutory damages available to rights-holders in a court proceeding to a range between $100 and $5,000 in respect of all works and all infringements for
non-commercial purposes. The CCC believes in strong deterrents for those who facilitate, induce and encourage copyright infringement to the detriment of creators who do not want to work for free. While the CCC supports strong deterrents for all infringers, it is aware that some damage awards might be considered to be disproportionate in the case of some – but not all individuals. For that reason it continues to support providing courts with the discretion to reduce damage awards in circumstances where they may be disproportionate. Unauthorized file sharing/downloading/streaming is online theft which robs creators and negatively impacts employment in the creative industries. In combating copyright infringement, the CCC encourages the Government to focus on copyright reforms that facilitate legal access for consumers and fair compensation for creators. The CCC does not support the proposed statutory distinction between commercial and non-commercial infringement in so far as it stands for the notion that the latter is not harmful to rights-holders. Moreover, the CCC does not believe that the Copyright Act should contain an exemption for copyright infringement enablers from statutory damages (e.g. BitTorrent sites which primarily enable acts of copyright infringement).

Solution

Do not introduce the proposed distinction between commercial and non-commercial infringement, but ensure that the courts continue to have the discretion to reduce damages in appropriate circumstances. Do not exempt copyright infringement enablers from statutory damages: delete proposed exemption 38.1(6)(d).

Issue #5 – ISP Liability

Bill C-32 provides for a ‘notice and notice’ regime under which ISPs would be obligated to send a notice to potential copyright infringers after receiving a notice of alleged infringement. ISPs would also be required to retain information identifying the alleged infringer for a prescribed period of time. The notice and notice regime is contrasted with a ‘notice and takedown’ regime prevalent in the United States, Europe and many other jurisdictions. The CCC questions the efficacy of the proposed notice and notice regime.

Solution

Implement a ‘graduated response’ or another collaborative system in co-operation with ISPs that relies on educating alleged infringers before more stringent measures are imposed. This could include limiting an infringer’s internet connection speed or capacity, blocking access to particular material or sites, or suspending access to specific sites, all after due process. Additional measures could also include escalating consequences after due process if an infringer or an enabler continues to engage in copyright infringement notwithstanding repeated warnings. In short, ISPs and other “intermediaries” should lose their “immunity status” if they fail to act reasonably to deter copyright infringement.

Issue #6 – Proposed Elimination of Collective Licensing Mechanisms

The proposed amendment to negate the broadcast mechanical licence is another example where collective licensing would be weakened under the Bill. Collective licensing mechanisms promote legal use of works and fair compensation for creators. Such mechanisms should be encouraged, not eliminated.

This proposed broadcast mechanical amendment would eliminate subsection 30.9(6) of the Act, which provides that the ephemeral recording exception does not apply if a licence is available from a collective society. Accordingly if made law, the proposed amendment would reduce royalties payable to rights-holders. Other proposed exceptions would have a direct impact on other collectives, including Access Copyright, Canadian Private Copying Collective, CMRRA/SODRAC Inc., and the Educational Rights Collective of Canada.

Solution

Don’t eliminate 30.9(6) of the Copyright Act. Look for ways to strengthen collective licensing mechanisms, rather than weaken or eliminate them.

Conclusion

The professional creators represented by the CCC support the modernization of the Copyright Act but Bill C-32 does not achieve that goal. Adding a multitude of exceptions to the Act is simply regressive, not modern, and the violation of our international treaty obligations by sections of the Bill will lead to lengthy litigation that will be harmful to everyone. Creators want their works distributed as widely as possible, but it is only fair that they be appropriately compensated for their efforts. Collective licensing is the way to achieve those twin goals while at the same time helping to build the digital economy.

The CCC looks forward to the Government implementing the provisions of the World Intellectual Property Organization ‘Internet Treaties’ as soon as possible so that in the next round of copyright reform it may move onto other issues of importance to Canada’s professional creators. For example, implementing The Artist Resale Right for visual artists, and defining in the Copyright Act the author of a cinematographic work as its credited writer(s) and director. These are but two issues which, when addressed, will meaningfully improve creators’ livelihoods by allowing them to take advantage of reciprocal trade agreements with many countries around the world where these rights currently exist as well as improving their rights in Canada. It is therefore imperative that the Government begin the review process as soon as possible.

Creators are the engine that drives Canada’s $46 billion arts and cultural industries. They are at the heart of Canada’s knowledge-based digital economy, and copyright is the legal foundation of their work. Modernized copyright legislation should ensure that creators can continue to survive and thrive in a constantly changing environment. In many respects Bill C-32 fails to do so and needs to be fixed

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

CREATORS PUSH FOR COPYRIGHT REFORM

By Op-Ed Editor | May 18, 2010

Canadian creators are urging the government to adopt copyright laws that support arts and culture in Canada.

“There are key steps the government could take today to reform Canadian copyright laws that would balance the interests of both Canadian creators and consumers,” said Bill Freeman, Chair of the Creators Copyright Coalition (CCC).

On behalf of Canadian creators from across the country, the CCC is looking for the new copyright bill to:

• Ratify the WIPO Internet Treaties
• Update the private copying regime
• Designate writers and directors as joint authors of AV works
• Facilitate consumer access to content while ensuring creators are fairly compensated
• No expansion of fair dealing
• Institute strong penalties against content piracy

“Our coalition brings together organizations with diverse interests. We all agree that these points must be reflected in the new copyright bill if the government is serious about taking a balanced approach that respects content creators,” said Freeman. “We also look forward to bringing our perspective to the upcoming digital economy consultations. For example, we’ll urge the government to consider the potential for collective licensing to facilitate consumer access to our works while ensuring Canadian creators are compensated.”

Media Inquiries: Bill Freeman, CCC Chair, 416 203-2956, billfreeman@rogers.com
BACKGROUND ISSUES OF COPYRIGHT REFORM
Position of the Creators Copyright Coalition

• Ratify WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty and WIPO Copyright Treaty. There is no good reason for Canada’s conspicuous failure to fulfil our commitment to the WIPO “Internet Treaties”, which Canada signed in 1997. In order to implement the WIPO Internet Treaties, Canadian copyright law must be updated on several fronts including a ‘making available’ right, adequate anti-circumvention provisions, protection of electronic rights management information, and moral and economic rights for performers.
• Screenwriters and Directors should be designated as the joint authors of audio-visual works.
• To maintain the balance between consumers and creators, copyright law must build on existing royalty systems so that income flows to artists regardless of how digital media develops. For example, the private copying regime needs to be updated and expanded to apply to technologies that are ordinarily used by Canadians for private copying so that creators are fairly compensated for this use of their work.
• Creators are looking for changes to copyright law that would facilitate the clearing of permissions, wherever practicable, through collective societies. These rights-holder-run societies, which provide reasonable access to users and reasonable compensation to rights holders, need amendments to copyright legislation in order to be able to function effectively in the digital environment. The real challenge facing legislators is how to provide reasonable access to our cultural heritage to everyone, including artists, without undermining the copyrights that allow art making to be an economically viable profession.
• New exceptions should only be introduced where the market has failed or is not able to meet the legitimate access needs of users. When exceptions are necessary, they should be carefully constructed to ensure that they meet the 3-step test mandated by the treaties that Canada has agreed to honour. Canada should not adopt fair use or an expanded fair dealing exception which would weaken copyright protection and require copyright owners and users to look to the courts for interpretation.
• We need strong penalties to prevent piracy of our works. At the same time, the government should concentrate on copyright reforms that facilitate legal access which fairly compensates creators.
• We need effective complaint-based mechanisms for rights-holders who object to their work being made available online without their authorization. It is not the role of ISPs to determine the legality of material being transmitted through their networks.

Media contact: Bill Freeman, Chair, CCC, 416 203-2956

MEMBERS OF THE CREATORS COPYRIGHT COALITION
Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
American Federation of Musicians (AFM)
Canadian Actors’ Equity Association (Equity)
Canadian Artists Representation/Front des Artistes Canadiens (CAR/FAC)
Canadian Artists Representation Copyright Collective (CARCC)
Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators in Communications (CAPIC)
Canadian Music Centre (CMC)
Canadian League of Composers
Guild of Canadian Film Composers (GCFC)
League of Canadian Poets
Professional Writers’ Association (PWAC)
Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC)
Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN)
Writers Guild of Canada
The Writers Union of Canada (TWUC)

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

Paying for Quality

By Christopher Moore | May 8, 2009

In the wake of The Globe and Mail‘s settlement with writers over its appropriation of their digital rights, there’s been some discussion of the actual state of newspaper contracts for digital uses of freelancer material.

The Globe now generally acknowledges creator copyright and seeks to licence one-time use in the print edition and “perpetual inclusion in the internal and commercially available databases and other storage media.”

CanWest’s terms are far harsher. Freelance writers are required to “irrevocably” surrender all rights to their work, including moral rights and copyright, with no opportunity for reselling or republishing the material without CanWest’s “express written permission.” CanWest, on the other hand, asserts the right to “exclusively use and exploit” the material “in any manner and in any and all media, whether now known or hereafter devised, throughout the universe, in perpetuity.”

I have never heard this last part read aloud among writers without provoking real laugh-out-loud disbelief (“across the universe?”), but there it is.

One consequence: some significant number of professional writers simply avoid that chain entirely. Former staff writer Charles Gordon and automotive columnist Shannon Lee Mannion are mentioned among those who no longer write for The Citizen and CanWest, because of its freelance terms.

Surely this is not entirely unrelated to CanWest’s edge-of-bankruptyc financial difficulties and the plight of much mainstream journalism in general. Who will pay them for crap when there is so much crap available for free? If newspapers want to offer the good stuff, they will have to be prepared to pay for it.

Now, if we coud get the universities and educators to grasp that, too….

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

Robertson v. Thomson: The Globe concedes

By Christopher Moore | May 6, 2009

It’s one small story in The Globe, one large leap for digital culture. The Globe and Mail, after thirty years of appropriating and reselling the work of freelance writers without permission or payment, has admitted defeat and negotiated a settlement with the class action led by Heather Robertson.

Trying to make the best of it after years of stonewalling, Globe counsel Sue Gaudi says:

It is primarily a historical matter from the days before The Globe and Mail entered into written contracts with our freelance contributors. We value our relationships with our freelancers and are happy to move on.

It is much more than that. In a decade and more of fighting the freelancers’ claim to payment, The Globe‘s lawyers insisted on a right to steal. Since they did not have permission to take what they wanted, they created a figleaf called “implied consent.” There would be no contracts, historically or going forward, if the court had supported this drivel.

With Google negotiating terms for sampling books online, with the Pirate Bay guys going to jail, with Kindle and iTunes and a million other systems demonstrating how access and rights co-exist in the digital world, that romantic moment when digital piracy seemed to be the wave of the future seems to be receding.

Congratulations to Heather Robertson and all her compadres; a difficult struggle, a remarkable victory. (Personal Note: I’m pretty sure I contributed nothing to The Globe in the period covered by the lawsuit and settlement and do not expect to be claiming a share of the long-delayed payment.)

Addendum: My extended take on this story from a couple of years ago here.

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

Child labour?

By Op-Ed Editor | April 21, 2009

Not exactly a copyright issue, but there’s rights here, and it’s all a bit gobsmacking. Brings back the need for real State of the Artist legislation and not that fraud we got stuck with a couple of years ago.

CHAPMAN’S WON’T EMPLOY CHILDREN UNDER NATIONAL COMMERICAL AGREEMENT
Ontario government needs to legislate child protections, says ACTRA

Toronto – Ice cream giant Chapman’s is producing commercials in Toronto with child performers, potentially as young as four years old, while failing to adhere to the minimum terms and conditions of work that have been negotiated in the Canadian commercial industry’s National Commercial Agreement (NCA).

“This company generates millions of dollars targeting children to buy their products,” said Dan Mackenzie, a spokesperson for ACTRA Toronto. “It’s distressing that they can’t see fit to ensure that the child performers in their commercials receive the protections, wages and residual payments negotiated between ACTRA and Canada’s advertising industry representatives.”

Standard rates and conditions for all performers are part of the National Commercial Agreement (NCA) negotiated between ACTRA and the Institute of Communications and Advertising (ICA) and the Association of Canadian Advertisers (ACA). The ICA/ACA represents both advertising agencies and the companies that hire the agencies.

“ACTRA takes very seriously the need to protect children in the commercial industry,” stated Mackenzie. “Children are especially vulnerable to pressures from advertisers, agencies, producers, agents and parents. Doing commercials outside of the industry agreement means that producers are not bound to standards negotiated in the NCA for wages, safety, tutoring, nutrition and other rules that limit the hours and conditions under which children can work.

Employment legislation in Ontario has very little to say about children who work in the entertainment and commercial industry. That is one of the reasons high profile Canadian actors are leading ACTRA Toronto’s lobby of the Ontario government to bring in Status of the Artist legislation that would enshrine child work rules in law.

“Advertisers who do not want to adhere to the minimum terms and conditions of the NCA highlight are why it is so important that the Ontario government bring in strong and enforceable legislation to protect children in the commercial, film and television industries,” Mackenzie added.

ACTRA Toronto represents more than 15,000 professional performers. As an advocate for Canadian culture since 1943, ACTRA is a member-driven organization that continues to secure rights and respect for the work of Canada’s English-speaking performers in recorded media.
-30-

For more information:
Chris Faulkner ACTRA Toronto Public Relations Officer
P: 416.642.6710
E: cfaulkner@actratoronto.com

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

The Google deal discussion

By Op-Ed Editor | April 20, 2009

ALAI Canada (wierdly enough that’s the acronym for the Canadian Literary and Artistic Association) is hosting a discussion of the Google deal on Wednesday.
ALAI CANADA

Toronto Luncheon Meeting
Wednesday, April 22, 2009

WHITHER GOOGLE AND THE BOOK BUSINESS?
Speakers: Catherine A. Campbell, lawyer and publishing consultant
Christopher Moore, writer and historian
Date: Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Lunch: 12:00 pm
Program: 12:30 pm – 1:45 pm
Place: Access Copyright boardroom, Suite 800, One Yonge
Street, Toronto M5E 1E5
(Toronto Star building, one stop south of Union Station on the LRT)

Cost: Non-members – $35.00 Members – $25.00 Creators – $15.00

The topic for discussion is the settlement of a class action in the United States against Google, brought by authors (with the backing of the Authors’ Guild) for copyright infringement and a separate lawsuit brought by five American publishers, backed by the American Publishers Association, raising the same issues. Millions of copyright books including Canadian books found in U.S. libraries were digitized by Google without authorization from the rightsholders. The settlement agreement between the Authors Guild, the Association of American Publishers and Google is subject to a “fairness hearing” by a U.S. District Court (Southern New York) starting on June 11, 2009. The settlement has been criticized for pre-empting what is more appropriately dealt with by legislation and for being anti-competitive. Rightsholders may opt out of the settlement until May 5, 2009, but is there a benefit beyond maintaining their right to sue Google themselves? Those who don’t opt out can remove their books entirely from all servers up until April 5, 2011 and terminate specific commercial uses later at any time. The settlement will set up a Book Rights Registry in the U.S. to collect revenues from Google for commercial uses and pay rightsholders. Is this settlement good or bad for rightsholders, readers, researchers and libraries? Where do Canadian books fit into this? What are the ripple effects for copyright revision and the emerging e-book market in Canada?

Permanent Link | Send Us A Comment

Next Page »
Op-Ed Pages Op-Ed Archives