Julianna Yau’s blog

Last month (April 2nd, to be exact), I send a form letter to my MP on C-10 Net Neutrality. I typically try to write a letter personally, but I just haven’t been able to find the time for that recently.

Here’s what I sent:

Honourable Andrew Telegdi:

I am deeply concerned about Bell Canada’s recent announcement that it will make its practice of throttling official starting April 7.

Canada does not have strict enforceable net neutrality legislation and so there is very little structure in place to prevent the big ISPs from discriminating by speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination.

I am outraged that Canada does not have a policy to protect my ability to communicate and access information freely on the Internet and urge you to take action on this matter immediately.

Sincerely,

Julianna Yau

And here’s the response I received today:

Dear Julianna Yau,

Thank you for your email regarding net neutrality. The issues you have raised are both valid and timely.

The internet is currently unregulated in Canada. Given the fluid and evolutionary nature of the internet, it is extremely difficult to develop effective measures to protect both consumer and internet provider. With that being said, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), is mandated to regulate the internet. Last year, the CRTC announced that it will be holding hearings concerning internet regulations by 2009.

In 2006, the Conservative government advised the CRTC that it should adopt a more hands-off approach and let market forces determine the telecommunications landscape as much as possible. This approach does not afford proper recognition to the rights of Canadian internet users, and has resulted in the problems we are beginning to see now in terms of internet providers’ practice of throttling internet connections.

I have forwarded your email to the Hon. Jim Prentice, Minister of Industry, so that your concerns can be properly addressed.

Thank you again for your correspondence.

Sincerely,
Katherine Preiss
Member’s Assistant
Hon. Andrew Telegdi P.C., M.P.
Kitchener-Waterloo

Related posts

• Writing to government about a copyright inquiry (2)
• Week (or so) in review: Copyright (1)
• The Responsibility of Preserving Public Art (0)
• Some [belated] thoughts on the throne speech (0)
• Roles and Responsibilities on the Web (4)

I’m trying to stay on top of blog reading/writing, so here are today’s noteworthy links:

• Michael Geist’s list of 5 copyright myths
• Charlie Angus also predicts a new copyright bill (link via Digital Copyright Canada)
• C-10 still won’t die
• The US isn’t having any more luck with patent reform than copyright reform

Related posts

• Week (or so) in review: Copyright (1)
• Writing to government about a copyright inquiry (2)
• Waiting For Copyright Legislation… (0)
• TVO’s The Agenda on Copyright (6)
• TVO On Copyright, Now Online (0)

The following notice of meeting has been released for C-10:

Wednesday, April 2, 2008
When the Senate rises
but not before 4 p.m.

Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act, including amendments in relation to foreign investment entities and nonresident trusts, and to provide for the bijural expression of the provisions of that Act.

I can’t seem to find the PDF I was sent on their website, so here it is. The link above is to the official governmental website.

Related posts

• C-10 Opposition Still Going Strong (0)
• Pat Martin and Tax Exemptions for Artists (0)
• More on C-10 (1)
• Digging deeper into C-10 (0)
• Continuing C-10 Drama (0)

Despite the fact that the opposition motion to Bill C-10 was voted down in response to the Senate Liberals’ intent to block the Income Tax Act from being used as a censorship enabler, the Banking Committee resumes study of Bill C-10 amidst public concerns about censorship.

CARFAC Ontario has published their press release on C-10, as well as a form letter which can be used to send to members of parliament. The Toronto International Film Festival Group has also published a press release on C-10. The Facebook group Keep your censoring hands off of Canadian film and TV! No to Bill C-10! has 29,360 members as of the writing of this post.

Related posts

• More on C-10 (1)
• Digging deeper into C-10 (0)
• Continuing C-10 Drama (0)
• C-10 on April 2nd (0)
• C-10 - Missing the point? (0)

Pat Martin is recommending a tax exemption for the first $50,000 of artistic income. Ireland and Australia already have tax exemptions in place for artists. With the low incomes of artists, this would be a great asset for artists—particularly emerging and mid-career artists.

Artists’ income are derived from various sources, including, if they’re lucky, government grants. Canada’s handling of artist grants is odd, considering that most grant money comes from the Canada Council or provincial arts councils such as the Ontario Arts Council. If a tax exemption for overall artistic income doesn’t get implemented, the least they could do is make governmental grants a source of non-taxable income. A tax exemption, coupled with the Canada Council’s recent announcement to increase funding for the arts, would be a welcome boost to the arts sector in Canada.

Related posts

• Jessica Litman - Rethinking Copyright (0)
• Copyright Reform Key Protection for Canada’s Artists (2)
• C-10 on April 2nd (0)
• Writing to government about a copyright inquiry (2)
• Week (or so) in review: Copyright (1)

Amidst all of the political drama surrounding copyright recently, I haven’t been making it a priority to think or write about the other issues in art (yes, there really are other issues than merely copyright!). Many of these other issues were highlighted at the Visual Arts Summit (see my summaries here) and copyright had, amazingly, a low profile at the summit. And I’m using the phrase “low profile” because I don’t actually remember copyright being mentioned, but find it incredible that it wouldn’t have come up at some point…

What was mentioned is the need to preserve our art. This was particularly poignant during the tour of the Gatineau Preservation Centre.

Josh Kanter, Chariman of the International Sculpture Centre’s Board of Directors, asked about “the relationship of the artist, artwork, and owner in the sphere of public art projects” in the Dec 2007 issue of Sculpture. Public Art was the topic of last year’s ISC Conference, and will be again this year.

Recently, we have seen some noticeable examples of public art being in ill repair…or worse:

• Daniel Buren threatening to destroy is own work because it has been ill maintained (and an interesting discussion of the threat on the Sculpture forum)
• The Wall, by Forrest Myers, being targeted for removal in favour of advertising space
• Banksy’s graffiti art being removed by maintenance staff throughout London
• And, of course, the recent threat to The Spiral Jetty due to a thirst for oil

What makes these cases different from someone accidentally putting their elbow through a privately-owned and privately-displayed painting by Picasso?

Firstly, a privately-owned work of art is most likely loved or held as an investment (and sometimes both!). This drastically increases its chances of being well-maintained and not subjected to a hostile environment or outright destruction (although there are instances where site-specific work has been sold to private estates, and conflicts arise when the home-owner wants to remove the work). A work owned by a collective (be it a company, governmental body, or other group displaying the work publicly) is more susceptible to becoming a low priority, particularly if the original purchaser is not there to defend it.

Public art, by the very nature of it being public, also amplifies the need to maintain the public’s access to the work. Throw in the fact that much public art is site-specific and the concept that the owner owns the physical manifestation of the artwork but the artist owns the integrity of the work, and you have yourself quite a conundrum.

Does the owner of public art have a responsibility to preserve the art? Or should artists who create public art understand that it will not be permanent? What happens when that public art increases in cultural value, like a historic building or monument?

Related posts

• Oil Drilling near The Spiral Jetty (0)
• Playing catch-up (0)
• My letter against the proposed drilling near The Spiral Jetty (0)
• Public Domain Donor? (0)
• Pat Martin and Tax Exemptions for Artists (0)

This came through my email today. I’ll be writing a separate post on the preservation of public art. The Spiral Jetty is an earthwork sculpture by Robert Smithson, and is an important work of modern art. You can read more about The Spiral Jetty on the Spiral Jetty website or on Wikipedia. You can also read the news coverage here or view the Facebook group here.

On 11 January 2008, Pearl Montana Exploration and Production, LTD., requested a permit to drill exploratory wells in the north arm of the Great Salt Lake just five miles from Robert Smithson’s Spiral Jetty. Although the permit was earmarked to be fast-tracked, FRIENDS and others requested an extension for comments from the public until 13 February 2008. Please see below for email addresses for comments and additional resources on the history of this important issue.

PLEASE take a moment to send an email to the addresses below. Comments are due by February 13.

johnharja@utah.gov
mikemower@utah.gov
jjemming@utah.gov

This permit is the first of many possible permit applications for oil drilling near Rozel Point. In 2006, FRIENDS and other conservation organizations successfully halted further development of oil and gas leases on 116,000 acres of the North Arm. Unfortunately, 50,000 acres already had open leases and have the potential for oil exploration and development.

If you would like to read some background information on the issue, additional resources are available by visiting:
http://www.fogsl.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=105&Itemid=1

See also:
http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2008/01/spiral_jetty_threatened_by_ene.html

Related posts

• My letter against the proposed drilling near The Spiral Jetty (0)
• The Responsibility of Preserving Public Art (0)
• Playing catch-up (0)
• Quick update (0)
• Public Domain Donor? (0)

Michael Geist picked up on an article which argues for e-petitions to have more weight in politics. And although I have signed a few e-petitions and joined many Facebook groups, I still have misgivings about the nature of click votes and petitions in general.

Matthew Ingram has reflected upon the usefulness of click votes in response to the CBC’s Great Canadian Wish List which was generated on Facebook. Even today, I marvelled at the fact that one of my friends on Facebook joined 45,853 other fans (as of the writing of this post) of the Heath Ledger Memorial page, while Geist’s heavily advertised Fair Copyright for Canada group sits at 39,470 members (and Facebook tells me that there are 374 new members…and I have yet to figure out the time span used to calculate a “new” member), and my little
Canada needs a public inquiry into copyright! group reports 1 fewer member, totalling at 114 members. Does this really mean that more people care about Ledger’s tragic death than fair copyright for Canada? Or that 39,356 people who think we should have fair copyright in Canada don’t think Canada needs a public inquiry for copyright? I certainly wouldn’t use the numbers from a Facebook group or page as the source of statistics for any real purpose.

I don’t think the issue is with fraudulent votes or signatures. Like traditional petitions, fraudulent signatures are a problem, but so is the value of the petition itself. As I have stated before, it is entirely too easy to sign something. I really do believe that, unless someone is actively against something, when asked to show support by doing something easy like signing a petition, they are likely to do so. That does not necessarily mean they understand the issues enough to be making a real decision, or that they truly care enough to do something real about it.

Related posts

• Week (or so) in review: Copyright (1)
• Visual Arts Summit - Day 2 - Further Thoughts (0)
• The New Face of Facebook’s Privacy Controls (0)
• Privacy, social networking and advertising dollars (1)
• Privacy Commission, Privacy Manifesto & Data Portability (0)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 21, 2008

TORONTO: Canadian artists have released their platform on copyright reform in anticipation of the Canadian government’s expected new copyright legislation. The PDF file can be downloaded here (optionally, you can also download the original .doc version).

The result of months of research and study, the Creators’ Copyright Coalition position paper outlines the reforms that creator groups would ideally like to see in Canadian law.

Members of the CCC believe that the making of art and contemporary Canadian culture is a vital part of life, and an essential ingredient of the information economy. If the new copyright reforms enhance and protect the rights of creators, then they will encourage art, contribute to our culture and enrich the lives of all Canadians.

“Without protection for performers and creators, we risk more than harming our international reputation, we risk damaging our industry at large. It’s in the public interest that artists and their work be protected so they can earn a living wage and contribute to our culture and economy,” said Stephen Waddell, ACTRA National Executive Director.

John Degen, novelist and Executive Director of the Professional Writers Association of Canada: “I believe Canada can have a strong copyright law protecting the work and careers of all professional creators, while fairly and reasonably addressing the concerns of both corporations and consumers. The CCC statement is meant as a step in that direction.”

Stan Meissner, songwriter, past president of the Songwriters Association of Canada: “While the digital age has offered music creators wonderful opportunities, it is clear that the rampant unpaid online consumption of music and other content has had a devastating effect. We need up-to-date copyright legislation that will protect the value of our rights, ensuring us a future where creators will be compensated for the use and enjoyment of our work.”

Bill Freeman, the chair of the CCC, said: “Creators have been waiting far too long for copyright reform. It is time to protect the rights of all authors and performers in the Internet age.”

The Creators Copyright Coalition (CCC) is an alliance of 16 professional associations of individual creators and performers and copyright collective societies active in the theatre, the visual arts, the applied arts, literature, music, recording and audiovisual (radio, television, film and commercials). Together these 16 associations and collectives represent more than 100,000 creators (authors and performers) who are copyright owners.

Contact:
Bill Freeman, Chair, CCC, 416 203-2956
John Degen, PWAC: 416- 504-1645

Related posts

• Visual artists on copyright reform (0)
• Writing to government about a copyright inquiry (2)
• Week (or so) in review: Copyright (1)
• Waiting For Copyright Legislation… (0)
• Reform of the Copyright Act - DAMI©’s platform (0)

I’ll be getting back to my deconstruction of copyright next week. Here’s what’s been floating around the web and blogosphere in the past week…

While most discussions about copyright infringement and the internet is focused on users as infringers, Digital Copyright Canada picks up on the itWorldCanada article We’re not thieves. We just can’t read contracts (McAfee and Open Source). Monica Hesse of the Washington Post also writes about the topic, focusing on corporate misuse of copyrighted photos.

The Crave blog finds software that allows users to record free, unlimited MP3 audio with your cell phone and hardware to share content between iPods.

Both Michael Geist and Russell McOrmond pick up on the Privacy Commissioner of Canada’s public letter to the Industry Minister and Canadian Heritage Minister on the impacts DMCA-style legislation has on privacy.

The Vancouver Sun also publishes an article arguing that reformed copyright laws shouldn’t suppress creativity.

Meanwhile, Howard Knopf picks up on another camcording bust.

And I’m still behind on my reading of some blogs I recently discovered:

• Northworthy
• ©ollectanea
• Scrutiny
• The Patry Copyright Blog

Related posts

• Waiting For Copyright Legislation… (0)
• Writing to government about a copyright inquiry (2)
• TVO’s The Agenda on Copyright (6)
• TVO On Copyright, Now Online (0)
• Steven Sandor on the Copyright Legislation delay (0)