There are a number of interesting issues regarding photographic copyright which
are touched on here. It is in a Canadian context, but the issues extend beyond
national borders.
tOM
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Tue, 6 May 2003 15:17:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russell McOrmond <russell@xxxxxxxx>
To: Universal Access Canada <cpi-ua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Copies to: copyright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
General Copyright Discussions <discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [d@DCC] Re: [CPI-UA] Follow-up: Statement by Minister
Copps outlining her
perspective on the question of copyright in the 21st century and its
impact
on creators
Send reply to: General Discussion <discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
(Copy to Universal Access forum, and Copyright Policy Branch of Canadian
Heritage, and the Digital-Copyright.ca forum).
On Tue, 6 May 2003, Paul Nielson forwarded a letter from Copyright Policy
Branch
http://vancouvercommunity.net/lists/arc/cpi-ua/2003-05/msg00060.html
I was at that forum. As a software creator and someone working to
protect citizen and creators rights in Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) I was made quite nervous by what Minister Copps was
expressing. She also interrupted me mid-sentence and directed the
conversation away from these ideas a few times when I spoke.
I also noted that CPAC did not broadcast the entire forum, and part of
the middle was missing. Missing was my attempt to encourage all creators
in the room to learn more about the technology they use to
create/communicate their works, and be especially concerned about who is
being granted third-party control over these tools!
Minister Copps speaks as if she is in support of Canadian creators, and
quite likely believes she is, but the policy brought forward suggest she
is more supportive of intermediaries (The "third constituency" that Susan
Crean and others tried to mention during the forum).
- Minister Copps seems unaware of the conflicting lobbying of the "third
constituency" of intermediaries who are seeking to take rights away
from creators and citizens. Many of the initiatives she has brought
in in the past (See article in Canadian New Media
http://www.flora.ca/cnm20030207.shtml about the media levy) and seems
to want to bring in in the future are harmful to creators and citizens
rights, but beneficial to intermediaries. The intermediaries are
third parties and shouldn't be granted rights at all in
copyright except those released by creators or citizens.
- Minister Copps seems unaware of the implications of ICT on
communications rights. When I tried to explain how Technological
Protection Measures(TPM) work she suggested that what I was saying
was ludicrous:
It is important to know about the two broad classes of TPM:
- Those that protect first-parties {sender and receiver) from third
parties. These are privacy enhancing TPM's, and are supported by
(and often created by) rights-supporting technology communities.
- Those that protect third-parties (intermediaries) from
first-parties. These are the ones that the opposed by the
Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) and many other aware
creator and citizens communities.
This is the type of TPM promoted by the intermediaries such as the
recording, motion picture and (monopoly) software industries.
As far as I am concerned, removing citizen control over ICT
is a violation of human rights, such as those expressed in article
19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
During the forum there was a photographer who was very confused about
why anyone would not be supportive of copyright. To him, copyright was
very simple.
His situation is an example of how complex things can get. If he takes
a photograph, currently Canadian law says that the person who hired him
gets the rights associated with copyright. He was there as a
representative of his community to try to make photography consistent with
other creative works where the photographer, painter, or other such artist
is the creator under copyright.
There are those who believe that the subject of a photograph should be
considered the creator, but I suspect these people are confusing the
rights under copyright with rights to privacy. I happen to agree with the
photographers who believe that the photographer should get copyright, not
the person who hires them. I believe this should be the case for all
creative works, and the "Work made in the course of employment" 13(3)
should be entirely removed from our copyright act.
What this photographer failed to realize is that the creator of his
camera, photo editing tools, and other technology also want to claim some
rights to his work. These technology intermediaries want the right to
restrict the photographer from taking pictures they don't want to be
taken, to restrict his ability to communicate his works to people they
don't want him to, and other such claimed rights.
In this case the rights aren't directly in Canadian Law, but the
software (technology law) that governs how the device works. What is
happening in Canadian laws is that through proposed changes such as legal
protection for TPM, this software/technology law may be being given
protection under Canadian law -- even in cases where the software may
contradict Canadian law (Fair Dealings, limit to term of copyright, limits
to scope of copyright, and so-on). This severe problem is already the
case in the United States, and has already caused the illegitimate arrest
of software creators, and threats against many others (including
university professors threatened if they released research papers).
Software creators currently also need to worry about patent law, and not
just the expression of an individual work. Imagine how a photographer
would feel if there was a patent on "a method of placing family members
for photographs where father and mother sit on chairs and the children
stand behind them"? This is the type of problem that software creators
are being forced to deal with, and the problem is getting worse every day.
I hope that our community will get a further opportunity to clarify this
situation, possibly a meeting with the Minister in person to have a longer
discussion.
Microsoft Aims for Protection - From Users
http://weblog.flora.ca/article.php3?story_id=404
Minister's forum on copyright: CPAC April 19/20
http://weblog.flora.ca/article.php3?story_id=395
---
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
Any 'hardware assist' for communications, whether it be eye-glasses,
VCR's, or personal computers, must be under the control of the citizen
and not a third party. -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/
--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca
------- End of forwarded message -------
---------
2003 Jun 28-30 in Ottawa:
http://www.CanadianCameraConference.ca
tOM Trottier, ICQ:57647974 http://abacurial.com
758 Albert St, Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8
+1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 N45.412 W75.714
"The moment one gives close attention to anything,
even a blade of grass, it becomes a mysterious,
awesome, indescribably magnificent world in itself --
Henry Miller, 1891-1980
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|