National Post position on copyright is opposed to free markets and for more government control
December 20, 2007
A friend of mine sent me a note on Terry Corcoran's latest editorial supporting Jim Prentice's copyright legislation. In it he labeled everyone opposed to the legislation - Telecom Trotskyites. I am still shaking my head that this story came from the National Post. I thought they were for Less Regulation, Less Government, and More Competition within free markets. This doesn't sound like it.
I love the allusion to Trotsky. Is this an allusion to the mass of people who are engaged in the industry in question actually protesting a bad bill? This makes us all Troskyites? My close friend and business partner Trevor Doerksen was an organizer for the Prentice open house protest in Calgary. We both believe in economic and personal freedom. We own our own companies and we own shares in other people's companies. I'm not too sure Trotsky would be a friend of ours.
It would seem that Terry's opinion is that the Government and a few large struggling media companies should legislate draconian restrictions on legal and ethical consumer behavior. The state's will over ours. This is 100% counter to economic liberalism. If Mr. Corcoran looks up people from Trotsky's time (1930s) who were diametrically opposed to economic liberalism he will find two very interesting individuals from history. Is this really what the National Post's is advocating?
Beyond the issue of actually curtailing ethical use of content, I and others believe that bill is counter to competition and innovation and will handicap Canada. Transparency and open access to information is today's reality. Even the Chinese government cannot control the information that people get in their country, and they are trying desperately.
Surprisingly, he lumps copyright issues with net neutrality. First net neutrality is a bloated on not well defined term in my opinion. However most advocates of Net Neutrality are focused on ensuring competition and innovation of all enterprises - the way of free markets. (Something, until now I thought Terry supported.) Take a simple point, without a level of net neutrality VOIP innovation would never have taken place, because it never would have been adopted by consumers - Telcos would shut it down because it cannibalizes their business. However, VOIP is great for consumers and businesses. It now saves my company about $2,000 a year. Sure that sucks for Telus. But they know how to compete. They can and must adapt. Terry obviously would prefer the government legislate them into a non-competitive advantage and monopoly on data services so that a small local company like FUGU Phone cannot compete.
Business models around the control of information and data are in utter collapse because new technology and consumption patterns have taken root. Mr. Corcoran, obviously believes that Canada should legislate ourselves back to the 1980s to sustain those failing businesses. I personally still believe in free markets and innovation and believe the markets will bring forth new businesses and opportunities, but to do so you must compete not sick your lawyers on our MPs to compete for you.
This has nothing to do with me, Michael Geist, or other thoughtful people being against copyright. We are all for new copyright legislation in Canada - we WANT it. But as a creator of IP, as a representative of individuals who create IP this bill is misguided and damaging.
I'd write a letter to the editor, but that would put control of my information into Terry's hands. It's a new world, Terry.
Additional Links:
Well done!
I really like your well thought out rebuttal to the article in the FP. Thanks! :)
Thanks for you kind comments, Deb
I was caught napping on the Copyright issue. I didn't realize we were so close to a "copyright precipice". If not for Michael an incredibly damaging bill would have been shoved through parliament. It's a critically important issue for both businesses and consumers and it is so refreshing to see so many regular people like ourselves getting involved.
Terry's editorial really surprised me. The National Post should be against the proposed Prentice bill. Terry's editorial, beyond being ripe with logical fallacies, illustrates the depth of misinformation and poor understanding of the issue at hand.
This is well said. Terry
This is well said. Terry Corcoran's argument that opposing invasive copyright is tantamount to communism, and that to have net neutrality simply prevents business from acting like business - is both idiotic and grossly inaccurate. Corcoran needs someone to monitor all of his online activities under the aegis of enforcing copyright and then subsequently air that dirty laundry - by his own logic to object means he is a Trotskyite.
...
However I differ from your opinion in that for the moment, unless there is a compelling need to change the copyright act, it may be best to leave it alone.
Leaving it alone is better than a bad bill
I agree that it is better to leave it alone than introduce a bad bill. I am not a lawyer, but certain things some lawyers have told me are at issue. For example, I want to implement a Canadian Creative Commons license for some of our projects, but I am told that the license itself has no standing in Canadian law, which still seems very strange to me. How can I as a content creator not determine the exact rights I want to give my work? Also, there is also so much ambiguity over file trading that leaving it as only causes more FUD. As such I think we would all really benefit from clear copyright legislation.