Canada at least is in a bit of a state of flux regarding its copyright laws. For example, currently it's technically illegal to record television programming for later viewing, and yet the sale of personal video recorders (PVRs) is perfectly legal. Odd, no?
With notions like this in mind, the federal government met with artists, tech companies, educators and many other kinds of organizations in public consultations which began July 20. The government, which has been typically known for progressive-mindedness when it comes to these matters (excepting a few slimy political types, of course), stated its goal is to achieve a balance between the interests of copyright holders and users of copyrighted material. The consensus among groups was in tune with this, though they have many different ideas as to what should be included in the updated laws. Naturally, some of these ideas conflict strongly with each other, though most seem to have the best interests of the people in mind.
Seven organizations were present, representing everything from TV, radio, actors, and puppeteers to librarians, video games, technology and hardware, to consumers themselves; we'll highlight the most notable suggestions from each.
First we have the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists, who put forth an idea we fully support: imposing a levy (an extra fee) on digital recorders are music players. This worked very well back when everyone was pirating music and burning it to CDs, and it seems overdue to these fellows for it to applied to the more popular technology nowadays. Assuming you shop around and research, you can get a great music player for cheap these days, so a minor extra fee shouldn't be a big deal, and most won't even notice the change, particularly with prices fluctuating as fast as they do in the industry. This allows artists, labels and the like to not lose as much money from pirated copies of records, films, etc.
The Canadian Association of Internet Providers, meanwhile, calls for ISPs to be less intrusive when it comes to pirated content, that is, not to require them to take it down, or cut off service of their customers for acquiring it. Chairman Tom Copeland says, "I don't think Canadians want their ISPs to become agents of law enforcement," adding traditionally they would pass on notices of violation from the rights holder, but that's it. He added that traditionally, ISPs have passed on notices of copyright violation from the rights holder, but that is where their obligations ended.
The Canadian Association of University Teachers is apparently in support of digital lockbreaking, at least under conditions of "fair dealing and use" (which the Canadian Library Association, or CLA, need to be clarified); they're also in favour of Canadian copyright law taking precedent over individual product law, and most interestingly, reduce the amount of time a copyright is in effect for. As it stands, an author's work is protected for his lifetime plus 50 years, which seems a bit unreasonable, really.
The CLA has the interests of the disabled in mind, too. For them, permissions are allowed so materials can be converted, for say, the deaf or blind, however other disabilities are not covered, and this needs remedying. Further, they'd prefer if such materials were allowed freely to cross between Canada and the US before the ban in 2004.
On the topic of video games, which is likely what you're most interested in, the Entertainment Software Association of Canada isn't so progressive. In fact, they directly oppose pretty well all the above mentioned suggestions, and push for protection of protection (i.e. make it illegal to crack disk checks, mod your console, break parental locks, etc.), albeit "supporting some exceptions" like allowing the visually impaired to make copies of a game manual, for instance. On the piracy front, their stance is ISPs should be required to remove illegal content following a notice from the rights holder, though the poster of the content could appeal. At present, an ISP is free to ignore these notices, and a court injunction is necessary to see its removal. Under the previous and dreaded C-61 bill (more information in the link posted at top), ISPs had to pass on the notice, but no further action was required. The suggestions largely stem from "zero day piracy", or piracy which occurs before a street date, or shortly thereafter, when a game makes its strongest sales.
Second last is the Information Technology Association of Canada, who we're fully behind as well. These guys have three main points: let research break digital locks (necessary for advancing security), focus punishment on those who profit directly from violating copyrights instead of pirates, and allow more freedom with technology purchases (e.g. usage on multiple devices or networks, allow "tinkering" for compatibility purposes with networks, older software, etc.).
Lastly is the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), which as you may guess, has you specifically in mind. They support most of the stuff already mentioned -- breaking of digital locks, more flexibility in fair dealing (i.e. remixing music), and more flexibility in media usage too, like legalizing recording of broadcasts, conversion of content to other media (i.e. making a digital copy of a book), and moving of content to other media (i.e. ripping a CD and putting the MP3s on your music player).
As for the results, we'll just have to wait and see, but right now, things sound quite reasonable; even the worst of it isn't so bad compared to what some rights vendors communicated at the Federal Trade Commission's town hall meeting (i.e. "buy the game again if your activations expire").
To end this off, here's a quote from the PIAC's counselman John Lawford we can surely all agree upon:
"I don't think you need to have protection of the protection."
Tim Burton Assembles ‘Mysterious Puzzle’ For ‘Alice In Wonderland’Story trailer released for PC action-MMO Dragonica
