The Bill C-11 committee has just opened the clause-by-clause review of the copyright bill with 39 amendments on the table: 8 from the goverment, 17 from the NDP, and 14 from the Liberals. The good news is that the misinformation campaign on issues such as fair dealing, user generated content, consumer provisions, statutory damages, and Internet provider liability has largely failed as the government is not proposing significant changes to those provisions. These all represent good compromise positions that will likely remain intact.

Unfortunately, the digital lock provisions will also remain largely unchanged as the government is not proposing to link circumvention to copyright infringement (both the NDP and Liberals will put forward such amendments). The music and movie lobby are getting one of their demands as the enabler provision will be expanded from targeting sites “primarily designed” to enable infringement to providing a service primarily for the purpose of enabling acts of infringement. The CIMA demand for an even broader rule has been rejected.

A summary of some of the proposed amendments, by party (note: subject to possible change should a party decide not to introduce the amendment):

change enabler provision to providing a service primarily for the purpose of enabling acts of infringement

a slight tightening of the private purposes copying exception and the time shifting exception by limiting to the specific individual

a new limitation on computer interoperability exception that restricts the use or disclosure of the information reproduced for the purposes of making the programs interoperable

a new limitation on disclosure of security flaws that requires advance notice to the copyright owner unless it is in the public interest to have it disclosed without such notice

a change to the network provider safe harbour that allows for extraction of meta-data

a limitation on the injunction power against information location tool providers

Conservatives

NDP

a new resale right for visual artists

adding the Supreme Court of Canada’s six factor test to fair dealing

making the user generated content provision subject to moral rights

remove the 30 day destruction requirement on lessons

change the restriction on digital library loans by requiring a notification of restrictions rather than the need to take measures to stop restricted activity

amend the new broadcaster provision on ephemeral rights

expand the provision on perceptual disabilities

link circumvention to copyright infringement

Liberals

adding a new conditions to time shifting and backup copy provisions that restricts the right to sell or distribute the recording or copy

change the 30 day destruction requirement on lessons

amend the new broadcaster provision on ephemeral rights

removing the five day use restriction on digital library loans

link circumvention to copyright infringement

The government’s decision to leave the digital lock rules untouched is unsurprising but still a disappointment, since both opposition parties were clearly persuaded that such a change was needed. On the other hand, given the heavy lobbying by many groups demanding changes to fair dealing (all parties rejected calls for a new fair dealing test or limitations on education), user generated content (there were multiple calls for its removal), statutory damages (there were calls for unlimited damages), and Internet liability (there were calls for notice-and-takedown and subscriber disclosure requirements), the government’s proposed amendments are relatively modest.

The thousands of Canadians who spoke out may have had an effect as the bill could clearly have been made far worse. There is a need to remain vigilant, however, as the clause-by-clause review has just begun, more changes could still come, and the lobbying will not end until the bill receives royal assent. With that in mind – and with both opposition parties supporting sensible compromises on digital locks – there is still a need for Canadians to speak to their MPs and other elected officials.