New NAFTA deal and Canadian Copyright

[PeterT]

See https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...smca-deal.html

OTTAWA–Canada has capitulated on copyright policy in the new trilateral North American trade deal, experts say, with a new “digital trade” chapter that could have wide-ranging implications on everything from Canadian content online to personal privacy.

The new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), announced late Sunday night, commits Canada to extending the term of copyright by two decades, from 50 years after the author’s death to 70 years. While that sounds like a relatively minor change, University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist said the costs associated with it could be significant.

[bgalbrecht]

Aw, you beat me to it by 5 minutes, but my title was going to be "Trump steals 20 years of public domain from Canada". It doesn't look like the deal made Mexican shrink the duration of copyright there from 100 years to 70, but at least it didn't force the US and Canada to increase it to an outrageous 100 years, either.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

It doesn't look like the deal made Mexican shrink the duration of copyright there from 100 years to 70, but at least it didn't force the US and Canada to increase it to an outrageous 100 years, either.

The US doesn't get forced when it comes to copyright. On January 1, 2019 books published in 1923 become public domain in the U.S., even if the author died, like Agatha Christie, more than fifty years later.

Perhaps the US Congress will once again save Canada's annual public domain day by failure to ratify, just as we did with the Trans Pacific Partnership.

P.S. There are some news articles claiming that Canada is taking on the same Life + 70 copyright rule as the U.S. This is mistaken, except as something planned for the very distant future. For the next 20 years, the agreement would take Public Domain Day away from Canada and keep it for the U.S. This is quite unfair to Canada, should it be ratified. (There may be good reasons to ratify, but not this.)

P.P.S. If Canada's parliament were to ratify with a signing statement that they won't be enforcing, in books only, anything past Life + 50, what would happen? Perhaps nothing! But only a country like the U.S. would have the conjoins to try that.

[GeoffR]

Canadian dairy farmers are going to be compensated for the deal, so shouldn't Canadian readers be compensated too? The government could give free book vouchers to every Canadian citizen on their birthday.

[pdurrant]

Very disappointing.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

...but my title was going to be "Trump steals 20 years of public domain from Canada".

As far as the copyright thing being a good deal or a bad deal, I don't know about that ... that's outside of my interest level to research. But one side can't blame the other for something they agreed to. It certainly wasn't "stolen". It was "agreed upon". If one side has second thoughts about what they agreed to in the past, they can whine and complain about it, call it unfair ... and renegotiate.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

...But only a country like the U.S. would have the conjoins to try that.

Did you mean cojones?

[bgalbrecht]

Originally Posted by haertig

As far as the copyright thing being a good deal or a bad deal, I don't know about that ... that's outside of my interest level to research. But one side can't blame the other for something they agreed to. It certainly wasn't "stolen". It was "agreed upon". If one side has second thoughts about what they agreed to in the past, they can whine and complain about it, call it unfair ... and renegotiate.

That's assuming Canada has any negotiating leverage in this treaty. The Berne convention only requires a minimum of life+50 for copyright, but the US has been pushing that to life+70 with any treaty that include intellectual property terms. It's a good thing for the US copyright holders to get an additional 20 years of copyright, and it's a bad thing for content consumers in Canada, who will now have to wait another 20 years for any new stuff to enter into public domain.

[pwalker8]

Just keep in mind that copyright term in the US is driven by movies and music, not by books. I suspect that as some of the big movies from the 30's start to approach public domain, we will see copyright be extended again.

[crich70]

And businesses like Conde Naste and Disney will be the spearheaders for such extensions should they happen.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Did you mean cojones?

Absolutely.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Just keep in mind that copyright term in the US is driven by movies and music, not by books.

That's why I figure they could get away with making a statement that they wouldn't actively enforce book copyright violations in the Life + 50 to Life + 70 tranche.

I suppose that might not be the Canadian way.

The American way would be to say it was a matter of national security. If we don't read cold war spy novels, how are we supposed to develop the imagination needed to protect ourselves?

[Pulpmeister]

Australia made the +50 to +70 move some years ago, in 2005, but didn't make +70 retrospective. Authors in the PD up until the change remained PD. So now we have two groups here: authors who died before 1955 (as per old +50), plus all the rest Life +70. As that is for authors who died after (this year) 1947 there's still some years to go before L+70 actually comes into full effect and only +70 books are PD.

[BadBilly]

Originally Posted by haertig

As far as the copyright thing being a good deal or a bad deal, I don't know about that ... that's outside of my interest level to research. But one side can't blame the other for something they agreed to. It certainly wasn't "stolen". It was "agreed upon". If one side has second thoughts about what they agreed to in the past, they can whine and complain about it, call it unfair ... and renegotiate.

What's worse than someone who comments on things they don't understand?
Someone who comments on things they think they understand.

[pdurrant]

Moderator Notice

Party Political posts deleted.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Party Political posts deleted.

ok, so I'll re-post a non political point that I made that got deleted. If one follows the news and op eds in the US, patent protection, especially medical patent protection, is a very big thing in the US right now. It's entirely possible that the main thrust of the negotiations was patent protection and copyright was simply swept up as part of the tendency to combine Patents and Copyright into one "Intellectual Property" bundle.

I frequently find that Harlon's Razor is true - "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately be explained by stupidity". A similar saying was attributed to Napoleon.