The International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) released a report yesterday that placed Canada on the same “Priority Watch List” as China and Russia for “…the serious piracy problem [Canada] has allowed to develop just across our border….” It was big enough news to make it on CBC News.

At issue is the lack of implementation of stricter and more modern (read US-like) copyright laws (including DMCA-like implementation of the WIPO treaties, a “notice-and-takedown” ISP liability safe harbour provision, “clarification” of the private copying exception — which makes downloading technically legal in Canada, and increased statutory penalties for copyright infringers), as well as stronger enforcement efforts domestically and at the border.

All of the doom and gloom in this report indeed makes it seem like Canada was lumped in with Russia and China for good reason — we should start hoisting the skull and bones instead.

Ah, but take this report with quite a bit of salt.

Nancy Segal from Foreign Affair and International Trade had this to say in a parliamentary committee meeting:

In regard to the watch list, Canada does not recognize the 301 watch list process. It basically lacks reliable and objective analysis. It’s driven entirely by U.S. industry. We have repeatedly raised this issue of the lack of objective analysis in the 301 watch list process with our U.S. counterparts.

I also recognize that the U.S. 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. This is not the same thing. If you aren’t on the watch list in some way, shape, or form, you may not be of importance. Most countries with significant commercial dealings are on the watch list.

A very thorough analysis of the IIPA report and its relation to Canada was blogged by William Patry. It’s a must read to gain a more balanced understanding of the the IIPA’s watchlist process, as well as where we actually stand from a copyright lawyer’s perspective (not a trade lobby group’s perspective). Indeed, Patry (to be clear, an American copyright lawyer) has this to say:

…[P]iracy (even as IIPA defines it), has existed for millennia, and the tools used to combat it have been traditional copyright rights and remedies. On this (and many other scores), Canada’s law is exemplary. I have not seen any proof that the U.S. TPM laws have led to a decrease in piracy within the U.S….

With all this salt required, you might want to make a big margarita… It would certainly make reading the IIPA’s report more pleasant.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 13th, 2008 at 3:12 pm and is filed under Fair Copyright, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.