Canada’s “Lawful Access” Initiative
Michael Geist (in the article “Say no to Big Brother plan for Internet” in The Toronto Star) describes the “Lawful Access Initiative” rattling around Ottawa. This is the one about making it easy for the police to eavesdrop on internet traffic, forcing ISPs to store and reveal usage information about their customers (and preventing ISPs from informing their customers when they’ve revealed private data) and allowing monster TelCos to discriminate against technologies like VoIP.
Also in the article is information about MP Sarmite Bulte’s initiative to abide by special restrictions regarding public domain content, by requiring them to apply for extended license. Upshot: even if a work is in the public domain, a school would have to pay fees to use it unless the work gave them explicit permission. sheeesh.
Write letters to these jokers. Dead trees and snail mail is better than email. My letter is attached, but don’t just copy it - write your own.
March 9, 2005
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
To:
David Emerson, Industry Minister
Liza Frulla, Canadian Heritage
Sarmite Bulte, Minister of Parliament
CC:
Libby Davies, MP, Vancouver East
Hello.
I am writing to you regarding the “lawful access” initiative that I understand is currently under discussion. I am extremely concerned that some of the reported premises of the initiative threaten the rights of Canadian citizens to:
- freedom of speech (by legalizing the interception of private communications over the Internet)
- accountability of government (by requiring the companies who provide logs of private communication to keep that information secret from their customers)
- freedom to innovate (by weakening the CRTC in ways that allow large telecommunications carriers to discriminate against innovative technologies such as VoIP)
I am especially concerned about the “extended license” proposed by M.P. Sarmite Bulte. To disallow schools from using material that is legally within the public domain unless the material has an explicit usage notice is entirely contrary to the concept of the “public domain”. When a work is in the public domain, it can be freely used *without* payment or permission, regardless of any statement - that’s a fundamental part of the definition of “public domain”. To require schools to meet additional criteria or to pay additional fees is an attack on the intellectual freedom of Canadians.
Furthermore, off-loading the responsibility for law enforcement to Internet Service Providers by allowing putative content owners to pressure the ISPs to block content undermines the rule of law in Canada by giving content owners the right of the judiciary and ISPs the right of enforcement.
Many Canadians, including myself, are following these issues closely and publishing information on our web logs. What is your position regarding these proposals and initiatives?
Yours very truly,