Canada Preps Launch Of An Actually Mostly Sensible ISP Copyright Warning System
from the almost-getting-it-right-for-once dept
Over the last several years, Canada has been working on copyright reform that not only actually makes sense, but, unlike efforts like SOPA here in the States, actually tries to incorporate user concerns (gasp). As part of that reform Canada reworked its ISP-to-user copyright infringement notification process, steering it toward a "notice and notice" system, which as we've noted in the past is vastly preferable to notice and takedown (or the ridiculous notice and staydown efforts) as it's less likely to stumble drunkenly into the realm of censorship and a litany of other abuses.Canada's new ISP notification system is preparing to finally take flight starting January 1, and like the country's copyright reform efforts, it tries to actually incorporate the concerns of all parties involved (gasp, again). The system is first and foremost designed to raise awareness of copyright violations. That really doesn't take much -- Canadian ISPs state that simply notifying the user (especially the user's parent) puts a big dent in infringement right out of the gate. More specifically, ISPs claim 89% of notice recipients don't infringe after the second notice.
Canada's implementation manages to educate Billy's parents on copyright while still managing to protect user identities and legal rights. And while Canada's notice and notice system requires that ISPs forward on copyright violation notices to subscribers (for penalty of up to $10,000 if they refuse), it then grants legal ISPs safe harbor protection from liability. If a copyright holder isn't happy with this and wants to proceed with legal action, they have to follow strict procedures and go get a court order (gasp, in triplicate).
Generally, the system is seen as a step up for copyright reform, though that's not to say Canada's implementation doesn't have faults. As Canadian law professor Michael Geist notes, their notice and notice system doesn't specify what the notices should say, leaving the door open to "settlement-o-matic" threats. Since the entertainment industry also isn't required to compensate the ISPs for the workload, you the consumer will of course be paying for the program in the form of broadband rate hikes:
"There are fears that Internet providers will be inundated with notices, particularly since the government decided against establishing a fee for forwarding them. That could lead to increased costs for consumers. Moreover, the government also declined to specify the precise content of the notices, leading to concerns that some copyright holders may include threats to sue alongside dubious demands to settle the allegations for thousands of dollars."Geist proceeds to note that Canada gets it mostly right and its implementation of copyright infringement notifications will likely be emulated by other countries. Well, probably not the States, where it seems inevitable the U.S. ISP notification effort (aka "six strikes") is destined to grow increasingly bloated as the entertainment industry slowly but surely demands expansion of the program. As it stands in the States, many infringers have simply hidden infringement by using popular BitTorrent proxy services. While Canada is busy getting it right, perhaps here in the States we can start seriously exploring outlawing proxies and VPNs to the benefit of job creators everywhere?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: canada, copyright, isps, notice and notice, takedowns
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
VPNs and proxies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Format shifting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Format shifting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The recordable media tax applies to blank CDs only. Not even to blank DVDs. The amount was set up (at the time) to offset the revenue lost by private copying - of music only. The money collected is distributed (in theory) to the musicians.
And so yes, Canadians are specifically allowed private copying - of music only - among friends and family. But NOT with strangers via any file sharing service; that would be publishing, which is obviously still not allowed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But, does it require the ISP to just send a notice to the "infringer" or does it require that they forward the specific notice they receive?
It seems like the ISP's may be able to come up with their own form-notice, and send that on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Settlement-o-matic
Does this mean ISPs in the US will now have to deal with free-form takedown notices from Canadian copyright holders, or will they still be able to demand that notices conform to the format prescribed by the DMCA? Conversely, will Canadian ISPs still need to handle DMCA takedown notices from US copyright holders, or will following the new "notice and notice" system be enough?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not all is well in Kanuchistan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not 'may', 'will'
There's no 'may' about it, letters like that will be sent out, because there's no reason not to, and the practice remains incredibly profitable.
If the ones writing the law were really looking for a balance, then there would be a standard letter set out, and the ones sending them would be the ones paying for the companies to distribute them. A penalty for false claims would be nice too, though that's even less likely to be implemented.
As it stands, the copyright owners have all the benefits, and everyone else gets all the downsides, just like any other law covering this sort of thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can see it for media than music...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The token time I got a notice it wasn't much more than 'you were caught sharing *this title* now stop it' (except in more official language of course). It was a pretty short e-mail with no fine threats or anything like that.
Sue 'em all hasn't taken hold here due to them not being able to sue us for much. Plus downloading mp3s 'for personal use' is pretty much legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]