Access Copyright wants anything but in Canada

As we’ve covered before, the Canadian government earlier this year put a call out to both individual Canadians and businesses and other organizations to state their cases for how the copyright should be treated moving forward.

One of the most, well, ridiculous submissions comes from Access Copyright, which collects royalties for writers and publishers. The name ‘Access Copyright’ is exactly opposite of what they want for Canadians. The group is opposed to just about everything you can now legally do with your media, and wants to put an end to recording TV, copying CDs to your MP3 player or move your ebook from one device or another.

The so-called format and time shifting exceptions, also known as personal use exceptions, were apparently included in Bill C-61 to address a practice that has become common among the public. Access Copyright submits that good public policy should not be dictated by legalizing common public practices.

It is worth mentioning here that Article 5(2)(b) of the EU Directive 2001/29/EC allows member states to introduce exceptions and limitations to the reproduction right for private use (which includes format and time shifting) “on the condition that rightsholders receive fair compensation”. The requirement for fair compensation is to ensure that the private use exception complies with the three-step test.

Access Copyright believes that copyright owners should be given the opportunity to address these “common practices” through market-based solutions…[from here]

Of course, when they talk about ‘market-based solutions’, it’s pretty clear that they mean finding a way to charge you more. After all, why should you use that PVR when you can pay to download or stream a video to your TV, and maybe pay again for another copy to your mobile phone.

All in all, the submission reads as if it was drafted in the Victorian era, arguing that no matter how infinitesimal the use,  all commercial applications should be licensed, and not fall under fair dealing.

Rather than an expansion of fair dealing, Access Copyright believes that it may be necessary to qualify the fair dealing provision as set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in the CCH decision, in order to ensure that Canada is compliant with the three-step test. Access Copyright contends that the fair dealing provision as interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada conflicts with the normal exploitation of a work and causes an unreasonable loss of income to creators and publishers.

Think that calling their submission something from the Victorian era might be a little harsh?  Heck, they’re even against 21st century solutions for libraries and those uppity librarians who ask for too much.