The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) released its annual Special 301 report (PDF) on Thursday, which discusses the adequacy and effectiveness of IP protections by US trading partners. As usual, China, Russia, Chile, and India topped the list when it came to concerns over piracy. But this time, the USTR gave some extra love to our neighbors to the north by elevating Canada from the regular "Watch List" to the "Priority Watch List" for the first time.

First, though, let's look at the usual suspects. The USTR acknowledged that China is paying increased attention to IP rights as of late, but that the continued goal in significantly reducing infringement throughout China has not been met. "China’s IPR enforcement regime remains largely ineffective and non-deterrent," wrote the USTR. The report goes so far as to say that China's officials may be concerned about their job security during the latest economic slowdown and, as such, have encouraged more lenient enforcement of IP laws.

On the upside, the USTR says that China went to "unprecedented lengths" to crack down on unauthorized transmissions of the Beijing Olympics in 2008, though overall piracy and counterfeiting levels remained "unacceptably high." Russia sits in a similar position as China, with piracy and counterfeiting remaining core concerns for content creators. "Despite having closed down some illegal websites offering pirated music, many more have sprung up in their place," notes the USTR, no doubt referencing the notorious AllofMP3 and its kin.

Now we finally get to blame the Great White North. Canada, which has consistently made the regular Watch List in recent years, was elevated to the Priority Watch List with the likes of China and Russia for the first time in the 2009 report. The reason Canada got this special treatment, it appears, is the country's "failure to accede to and implement the WIPO Internet Treaties" that it signed in 1997, as well as allegedly not delivering on its promises to improve IP rights protections and enforcement. This, as pointed out by University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist, is despite Canada's enacting anticamcording laws in 2007 and the fact that Canada has joined the US as a third party in the WTO copyright complaint against China.

In fact, Canada does not even recognize the USTR's Special 301 Report process; officials argue that the report lacks objective analysis. In 2007, the House of Commons reiterated that it doesn't think very highly of the USTR's list: "We have repeatedly raised this issue of the lack of objective analysis in the 301 watch list process with our US counterparts. I also recognize that the US industry likes to compare anyone they have a problem with, concerning their IPR regime, to China and the other big violators, but we're not on the same scale."

The US-based International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) also targeted Canada earlier this year for special attention as a "priority" offender (in addition to China, Russia, and 35 others). The IIPA represents the BSA, ESA, MPAA, RIAA, and other major copyright business groups, however, and does as much as it can to influence the 301 process. It comes as no surprise, then, that the IIPA was pleased with the USTR's 2009 list. "Special 301 is a critical tool by which the US government has been able to secure improved copyright protection and enforcement as well as fair and equitable market access with our trading partners," said IIPA representative Eric H. Smith in a statement issued Thursday. "We commend USTR for the decision to elevate Canada to the Priority Watch List. Canada remains woefully behind the rest of the developed world (and many countries in the developing world as well) in adopting critical legislation that will facilitate the development of a healthy online marketplace for copyright materials."

The IFPI nodded in sad agreement: "It is very unfortunate but correct that Canada has been placed on the United States Special 301 list of countries that offer inadequate protection for intellectual property," the music group said in a statement.