Canadian DMCA Bill C-61: Letter to MP Wayne Marston

This is the letter that I sent to my Member of Parliment (MP), Wayne Marston on May 20th 2008, prior to the tabling of bill C-61.

I am a constituent who cares about Canada’s cultural policy, and I am writing in regard to legislative proposals for “copyright reform.” During the last Parliament, Bill C-60 provided some very sensible approaches to this complicated topic, but it also left room for improvement.  As you consider the issue of copyright reform, I hope that you will work to ensure that any new legislation is not a regression from the sensible policies set out in Bill C-60.

In particular, I do not believe that “digital rights management” (DRM) technologies should stop the public from making lawful uses of their legitimately acquired media.  Publishers using DRM push aside the delicate balance between copyright and the rights of the public - a balance set according to an assessment of the public interest by legislators - and replace it with one-sided rules that reflect publishers’ private interests. Even artists disagree with publishers’ anti-consumer use of DRM, as evidenced by the recently formed Canadian Music Creators Coalition. Therefore, as in Bill C-60, new copyright reform legislation should not make it illegal to circumvent DRM for lawful purposes.

I am also concerned that the use of DRM can threaten computer security and consumer privacy, as in the recent Sony-BMG “Rootkit” fiasco.  When content companies routinely use technological measures to control how people enjoy entertainment in the privacy of their own homes, I think we need protection *from* DRM more than we need protection *for* it.

Transparency in computer software is essential to secure operation. I both utilize and contribute programming expertise to Open Source projects, not controlled by a single company. Fundamentally, DRM requires that people do not have control over their devices, and thus the people cannot publically debate, disclose, and contribute to such projects. I object to any legislature that makes it illegal for Canadians to tinker with the hardware, software, and media that they have ownership of. In effect, legislature that prohibits circumvention of DRM places control of Canadians’ rights in the hands of forign corporations.

For example, many cellphone handsets sold today support playback of musical ringtones. Customers pay for phones with such capabilities. However, in the current climate in America, companies often cripple handsets to play only approved ringtones, which are sold for exhorbant prices. This is artifical market control, and forces customers to pay twice for the same media. 

Implementing DRM in any hardware or software solution increases development and production costs, and reduces the value to users of that technology. DRM takes away rights such as time shifting (record something and play it later, like you can with a VCR), format shifting (for accessibility by disabled), and copies approved by the Canadian copyright laws (such as for context in political commentary, parody, and other analytical processes).

These concerns are shared by a substantial and growing number of informed Canadian citizens.  I hope that you will take them into account when considering any changes to Canadian copyright law.  Thanks very much for your time.

If you haven’t already, write to your MP, and make sure you know where each other stand on this issue! What else can you do?