|
Bill C-32, ''An Act to amend the Copyright Act'', was a bill tabled on June 2, 2010 during the third session of the 40th Canadian Parliament by Minister of Industry Tony Clement and by Minister of Canadian Heritage James Moore. This bill served as the successor to the previously proposed but short-lived Bill C-61 in 2008 and sought to tighten Canadian copyright laws.〔Reynolds, Graham. The Mark News, (How balanced is Bill C-32? )〕 In March 2011, the 40th Canadian Parliament was dissolved, with all the bills which did not pass by that point (including bill C-32) automatically becoming dead. Many restrictions in the bill were harshly criticized, especially those regarding the circumvention of digital locks. Law professor Michael Geist commented that the bill was introduced by an "out-of-touch Moore, who has emerged as a staunch advocate for a Canadian DMCA". After Bill C-32's introduction, James Moore responded to criticism by calling the bill's detractors "radical extremists".〔 In the aftermath of the bill, the United States diplomatic cables leak revealed ongoing pressure from US officials wanting Canada to pass stricter copyright laws. The bill was revived in the next Parliament as C-11 on September 29, 2011. ==Content== The bill would have criminalized the act of circumventing, or making available to the public the ability to circumvent, digital rights management software locks.〔 These restrictions were described as "arguably worse than those found in the U.S."〔 While explicit mentions of "videocassettes" in Bill C-61 were replaced with technology neutral terms, the copying of DRM encumbered media such as DVDs was still prohibited by Bill C-32.〔 Bill C-32 was also interpreted as banning the user of region-free DVD players. According to CBC News, the bill would have even criminalized "websites designed to encourage violation and piracy". When describing the main principle of the bill, Michael Geist said "anytime a digital lock is used - whether on books, movies, music, or electronic devices - the lock trumps virtually all other rights."〔 Bill C-32 called for a mandatory review of copyright law every five years. Two clauses it introduced that had not been seen in previous Canadian legislation were an exception that allowed unlocking cell phones and a "YouTube exception" permitting compilations of copyrighted works as long as they had no digital locks.〔 Under the bill libraries lending materials electronically would have been required to make those copies self-destruct within five days. Schools offering online course materials would have been obligated to render those materials inaccessible thirty days after the course's end date.〔 Performers and photographers were set to receive greater control over reproductions of their works. Bill C-32 sought to subject Internet Service Providers to a "notice and notice" obligation. Such a scheme requires accusations of copyright infringement to be forwarded to the subscribers being accused and information about them kept for a period of time.〔 The bill proposed to limit statutory damages to $5,000 in the case of non-commercial infringement, compared to the previous fine of $20,000 that did not distinguish between commercial and non-commercial.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「An Act to amend the Copyright Act (40th Canadian Parliament, 3rd Session)」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|