Tell that to Quiapo

While reading one of my favorite sites, I stumbled upon a news that’s news-worthy enough for us communication technologists. It is available here.

The Summary

To give you guys a summary of the news, it’s all about how the Canadian government would want to innovate its copyright laws due to the massive use of file-sharing processes. Bill C-61 was introduced by the Conservative Party of Canada in June 2008 and it created  a lot of noise in the consumers’ and creators’ worlds. The Bill, at first , is legislating for improvement in the copyright law. Concepts such as time-shifting (TiVo thingy), file sharing (P2P), DRM (Digital Rights Management), fines (C$500/pirated max instead of US$9,000/creation pirated), and laws that would protect creators from the hands of law-circumvence. The Bill created uproar in the different sectors of the Canadian society until news for the bill died out some months ago.

What’s Now?

The Canadian government is back, and now with a fresh perspective of the bill. Due to irreconcilable debate regarding the bill, the government is actually asking its citizens on their views regarding the bill. This time, they are not the ones who will be imposing on the bill that only created media mileage and achieved zero solution, but the government actually wants to hear from the people who use these technologies! How is that even possible? Is it fictitious? I don’t think so. The government has even put up a Copyright Consultation site to ask its citizens on how they would want the new copyright law to influence digital rights, consumer’s use of it, and the creators as well. To quote Minister of Industry Tony Clement: “Canadians are concerned with copyright and its implications in our increasingly digital environment. . .” Our goal is to give Canadians from across the country a chance to express their views on how the government should approach the modernization of copyright laws. Your opinions and suggestions will help us draft new, flexible legislation so that Canada can regain its place on the cutting edge of the digital economy.”

Flexible. I love the term.

So what is in the site? Essentially, just five questions.

1 . How do Canada’s copyright laws affect you? How should existing laws be modernized?
2 . Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time?
3. What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster innovation and creativity in Canada?
4. What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster competition and investment in Canada?
5. What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?
My eyes suddenly filled itself with water for no reason (maybe because I’m rubbing it now :p). Is this for real? I mean, IS THIS FOR REAL? The government, the high institution that prides itself in getting work done by representatives that don’t speak representatively, and loves shooting binding walls to its citizens, is getting knowledge from the “ordinary” peasants? Yes. And it’s happening in one part of the globe, a huge part at that.

Implications

Going back by jet, we now focus on its implications on our country. What does it mean for our country?

The Philippines is, like Canada and many other countries, in need of a serious reform regardng DRM and Copyright laws. Taking into consideration the Canadian move, we might actually gain from this inspiration. How about setting up the kind of consulation Canada is doing right now? I think the government needs to listen to the people to prevent everlasting debates that the government itself is engaging by referencing on books, not on experience. The people need to be heard. That’s why social media is sprouting its cones like mushrooms-too fast you don’t even see it coming. What Canada has done is not only get better resource, knowledge, and wisdom from its constituents, but also embrace the face that times are changing, and people want to be heard because they have something to say.

Unfortunately, I could only hope that the Philippine administration adopted to these changes in society. We are still living in a classical environment, with classical procedures, even with classical leaders. Hayden Kho and Katrina Halili will still be toys of media, the administration and the Internet, forever holding to the sight of a law that would protect their interests. I am not saying that file-sharing is bad, but boundless file-sharing is gonna go kaboom like New Year. There should still be limitations, and the collective wisdom of the people will solve this problem.

As organizational communicologists as well, we are tasked by our principles to take an active part into the changes that our society is undergoing. Lots of repairs here and there, and reconciliations between baby boom, Gen X, Gen Y, and NetGen are being stitched. Let us be mindful of the implications of rules and procedures here in our country, and how they will shape our future. Let us be proactive in engaging people to speak out their concerns about the flux of technology, for without engagement, there could be no attachment-attachment to the country that Jose Rizal is calling as Nationality.

The choice is always within the people. And while you’re deciding, watch the 9-year “champ” with her awfully-crafted, bad-PR statements last year.

Advertisement