Nowadays, people live in a world of digital information and technological growth. Each day, companies face issues with the loss of data and the information flow after all. People all over the world invent different ways to track specific data and inform both the receiver and the producer about the transfer that occurs. However, the stream of information is usually hard to manage due to the lack of regulation that protects the producer. The consumer might obtain the information and become the one who sells the information to others, thou becoming the producer while that is the violation of the Canadian Copyright Modernization Act. However, the new Bill C-11 regulation helps individuals to obtain the needed security and management which they deserve. Moreover, two direct regulation that includes such terms as digital locks and reproduction for private purpose appeared to set the advanced set of rules that led the copyright system to the next level of the managerial competition. For now, Canada became one of the best countries that implemented the needed regulations to secure copyright acts, and it is important to critically discuss all changes in order to prove the need for those changes and highlight all problematic and positive aspects of that change.
Digital locks appeared to serve as the introduction to the Bill C-11 due to its competency and growing concern of digital innovations and digital safeness. However, the needed act highlighted the alternative definition of the digital security and composed the term ‘technological protection measure’ to capture the needed regulation by empowering specific aspects of the copyright regulations. The point of the appearance of the digital locks was to prevent the raising trend to make CD and DVD copies of specific information that consumers got from the real producer, thou claiming the unique ability to be the owner of it. The thing here is that digital locks allowed people to protect their work by specific techniques that limit the consumer access to the information and helps to prevent copyright issues. Any tool that might help with that purpose might be classified as the digital lock.
The next step of advanced regulation was the invention of the reproduction for the private purpose remark. That remark helped with the identification of legal copyright that is allowed in order to increase the customer’s satisfaction. However, the ‘reproduction for private purpose’ allowed consumers to reproduce the copyrighted material for the private purpose within the stated legislation. That includes the reproduction of the material within the individual’s digital tools but also includes the part when the individual has to obtain the product in the right way which is to obtain it legally. The legally obtained product which is bought or rented has to be carefully tracked by the individual because any destruction of its private use might be illegal. Any attempt to spread the information is also illegal even if the destruction of the products privacy was not intentional; the consumer who made the mistake is responsible for the law’s violation. The thing is that the private use excludes the audio records use because that issue is more complex. The regulation of the audio works usage is stricter due to the fact that the music can be noticed by many people around the private purchaser which are the violation of the copyright law due to the fact that other people can listen to the music that was not bought by them previously. However, there is a need to obtain the product legally which was stated before so that it is needed to implement these limitations of privacy destruction and audio recording medium and state it clearer for people which were done by the Bill C-11.
Both digital locks and reproduction for private purpose formulate the combination of specific laws’ points that help people to regulate their technological consumption. The Bill C-11 was introduced also to regulate other aspects of our life which have the correlation with the digital tools’ usage and the information storage. The problem here is that people try to circumvent rules and get the copyright information without any purchase. That cheating also includes the rewriting of information from one person to another. As was mentioned before, the legally obtained product is a well-stated “story” that is easily regulated by law, but the person who tries to enjoy goods without the pre-purchase is responsible for that if that destruction of privacy happened due to the direct intention of another person (for example stealing the iPad which had music from iTunes on it). In any other cases, the actual person who is responsible for the informational loss is responsible for the violation. Simply stated, all schools prohibit cheating because copying ideas of others are illegal and does not help the education purpose. The same reason provoked the copyright protection movement while the losses of illegal copying overcome billions for any private sectors. For now, people only concern about the existence of cloud information storage because, technically, that space is on the Internet which opens access to the information worldwide, thou destructing the privacy of any information, while it is a space for the private use. However, the Government still needs some advanced corrections to cover the cloud-stored information.
One of the newest implementations that made the Bill C-11 so popular is the enhancement of the educational usage of the information. For now, teachers can use the information which can be easily obtained on the internet in their classes while making sure that this information does not violate copyright act. The Bill introduced fair dealing expansion which deals with such issues and state that some techniques might be ‘fair’ while violation some terms of private usage. For example, the preview can appear as the violation of the copyright of first pages of the articles or the audio sample might look like the direct destruction of the copyright law. However, the fair dealing expansion states that educational, satire and parody purposes might be stated as fair for ‘small’ violations of a low percentage of the original work. On the other side, samples of audio works are usually much shorter and in a worse quality that original works which make it fair for consumers to obtain the proper research and be satisfied with their product. Advertising purposes make it fair for people to make these samples because they help people to navigate on websites, find relevant songs, be satisfied with their product, and get attracted to new songs by listening to short samples.
To summarize the issue, it should be mentioned that digital locks and reproduction for private purpose formulate the complex set of legislation regulations that help Canadians state their trajectory to the future prohibition of copyright violations. However, there the regulation still lacks some formal implementations to cover all existing aspects of the digital tools’ usage and data flow. On the other hand, Bill C-11 is a confident step forward that will benefit Canada in the long run and inspire further implementation of copyright regulations that might make the Canadian legislation close to the perfect stance.