While there has been great interest in the Bulte story for the past two weeks (which continues with Cory Doctorow's terrific op-ed yesterday on the dangers of U.S. style copyright reform in the Toronto Star, Rob Hyndman's great post on the impact of blogs, and the Globe's Matthew Ingram), I think it is important to understand that Thursday's fundraiser and the history of financial contributions is only a small sample of the link between lobbying and campaign contributions with copyright reform.
Using government records and information obtained under the Access to Information Act, my Law Bytes column (Toronto Star) reveals a process that is badly skewed toward lobby interests and in serious need of reform. From the column:
Industry Canada' s Lobbyist Registration Database includes dozens of registered lobbyists for copyright interests. For example, the Canadian Recording Industry Association currently has five registered lobbyists on its payroll, while Access Copyright' s similarly sized contingent of five registered lobbyists even includes former MP Paul Bonwick, a Bulte contributor who worked closely with her on a 2004 copyright report while both served on the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.
Financial contributions to political parties and MPs are commonplace, which helps to explain Canadian Motion Pictures Distributors Association President Douglas Frith' s response to the furor over the Bulte fundraiser. Frith argued that the process was balanced by virtue of his organization' s financial support for both Liberal and Conservative candidates.
According to Elections Canada, in the decade from 1993 to 2003, CRIA provided campaign contributions to the Liberal party in every year with the exception of 2001. While during many years only modest amounts were donated, by far the largest contribution was made in 1998, which came immediately after the passage of copyright reform. That reform bill included the establishment of the private copying levy that has since generated more than $140 million in revenue for the industry and artists.
While the impact of lobbyists occasionally comes into public view through the presence of MPs at industry-sponsored events, most of it is evident only behind closed doors.
Greater access to Ministers and government officials is certainly one of the most important consequences. A March 2002 letter from then CRIA President Brian Robertson to newly appointed Industry Minister Allan Rock, obtained under the Access to Information Act, provides a classic illustration of this phenomenon.
The CRIA letter congratulates Rock on his new position and urges him to support ratification of the World Intellectual Property Organization' s Internet treaties. Rock is advised that CRIA has enjoyed a very productive dialogue with Canadian Heritage Minister Sheila Copps "persuasive enough to have the Minister of Heritage publicly state. . . that it was now the government' s intention to ratify the Treaties."
The copyright lobby has also proven successful in obtaining greater representation before parliamentary committees as well as in securing meetings with government officials. During Bulte' s tenure as chair of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage in 2004, the committee was perceived to be decidedly pro-copyright lobby with panels stacked against user interests.
That perception is borne out by internal government documents which verify that Bulte shot down a proposal to allow Industry Committee MPs, who are generally perceived to provide a technology-focused balance to the debate, to attend copyright hearings. Bulte's terse response indicated that "the chair of the heritage committee is not open to the suggestion of inviting industry committee members."
The copyright lobby also meets regularly with government officials. A document obtained under the Access to Information Act titled "List of meetings between Canadian Heritage' s Copyright Policy Branch and its stakeholders in copyright reform" indicates that in the nearly thirteen months between April 1, 2004 and April 25, 2005, government and policy officials from that department met or held teleconferences 15 times with Access Copyright, 14 times with music collectives, seven times with CRIA, and five times with publisher associations. Meanwhile, the document lists only one meeting with education groups, two meetings with public interest groups, and two meetings with technology groups.
In fact, the close connection between the copyright lobby and government can even extend to contracts. Last year, the Canadian Publishers' Council, whose executive director is one of the hosts of the Bulte fundraiser, obtained a $20,000 contract for a "copyright awareness initiative" whose goal was to develop an Internet-based social awareness campaign to "engage young people in a new conversation about copyright."
I conclude by arguing that copyright policy must be both fair and seen to be fair. It is time for a new approach that starts with a commitment from all MPs who accept funds from the copyright lobby not to serve in Ministerial positions or on legislative committees that involve copyright policy. The final week of the election campaign provides the ideal opportunity for Canada' s leaders to begin to clean up Canadian copyright.
Michael Geist [Geist is the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. He can be reached by email at mgeist[at]uottawa.ca and is on-line at michaelgeist.ca.]
