Heritage committe sees controversy over timetable for WIPO ratification

Breaking news: See Short Takes in this issue for breaking news on this story, obtained as this issue of Canadian NEW MEDIA was being finalized. Members of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage used the occasion of their October 30 meeting to defend their decision to press ministers Sheila Copps and Allan Rock for action on implementing the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Internet treaties. The move came in the face of pleas from the Canadian Cable Television Association (CCTA) not to rush to sign the controversial agreements without protection for Internet service providers (ISPs). Committee members on October 23 passed a motion asking the departments of Canadian Heritage and Industry Canada to have draft legislation ready by mid-November that would pave the way for treaty ratification and gave the ministers until November 4 to instruct their officials along those lines. The motion was passed with only Carole-Marie Allard, parliamentary secretary to Canadian Heritage minister Sheila Copps, dissenting - though reports indicate she may be inclined to agree with the spirit of the motion. But a coalition of public interest advocates that includes broadcasters, cablecos, ISPs, telcos and others says the timetable could leave the government in the position of passing what CCTA VP of legal affairs Jay Kerr-Wilson called a "half-a-bill" during the group’s testimony before the committee. In a letter to the committee, the Balanced Copyright Coalition writes: "The amendments necessary to ratify the WIPO treaties cannot be dealt with in isolation. It is important to note that policy makers in other jurisdictions, including the United States, Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand have all addressed issues like ISP liability and access either before or at the same time as the amendments required for WIPO implementation. We do not think it would be in the public interest to put Canadian consumers and Internet industries at a substantial disadvantage relative to these other jurisdictions by proceeding with only part of the digital agenda." During his testimony, Kerr-Wilson clarified the letter to say that the coalition is worried that the specific wording of the motion passed by the committee would leave the department to create WIPO-specific legislation without dealing comprehensively with ISP liability. In the United States, for example, where legislation necessary to ratify international treaties was built into the country’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Americans also included comprehensive safe harbour provisions that provide processes to follow in the event of copyright disputes that limit their liability. Liberal Paul Bonwick, however, saw the coalition’s letter in a different light. Responding to the group’s missive, Bonwick suggested that the wording in the letter differed from Kerr-Wilson’s oral testimony. "As a signatory to this letter," he suggested, "you clearly don’t have confidence in the committee (to protect ISPs)," he said. But coalition observers took comfort from the member’s subsequent words as he assured the group that the committee wasn’t "viewing ratification in silos," and that ISP liability would be on the table in a fast-tracked implementation process. Bonwick also defended the quick turnaround the committee is now demanding by stating that most European Union countries have already drafted or passed legislation that would bring them in line with the WIPO treaties. The committee’s stance was, in turn, praised by the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists’ chief counsel Ken Thompson, who characterized the committee’s call to action as courageous. "We’ve had plenty of time to discuss this," he said under questioning from MPs. Committee members also noted that draft legislation would be a starting point and that stakeholders will be given the chance to have input on its final form. Members including committee chair Clifford Lincoln and Liberal Liza Frulla raised concerns that ISPs might be asking for too much with regard to liability, however. During her questioning, Frulla asked the CCTA, "It’s like saying the ISP is not responsible for anything…what would satisfy you?" Lincoln noted that some ISPs were being held responsible in Europe for the distribution of such things as hate material. Kerr-Wilson answered, saying "We’re not asking for a get-out-of-jail-free card where ISPs can get out of anything." While ISP liability and WIPO treaty implementation dominated the October 30 Heritage committee meeting, other issues raised their head. Notably, representatives of L’Association des producteurs de films et de télévision du Québec told the committee that it needs to consider a new private copying regime for audio-visual materials. Mylène Alder, co-director general of the association, said that in 2002, 20% of teens in Quebec had admitted to downloading movies. Canadian Alliance MP James Lunney also put consolidating the departments responsible for copyright on the table. Witnesses agreed that split oversight for the area is leading to delays, though none agreed on whether a solution might lie in creating a new department by consolidating those activities under a single minister.

Heritage committe sees controversy over timetable for WIPO ratification

Broadcast | November 7, 2003

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us