Max Headroom and Copyright Law

Max Headroom

Max Headroom was a great science fiction TV series featuring Matt Frewer in the dual role of intrepid reporter Edison Carter and his virtual alter ego Max Headroom.

Edison Carter: the man with the cam.

Rather grittier than the American remake, the British pilot was much darker overall. Being shot on film, it had much better production values. The biggest difference between the British and American versions was that the British version of the computer genius Bryce was a simply too detached from humanity, and had to be cast with a more accessible actor for the series to work. And even though it was shot on video, because it was idea driven the series worked very well indeed.

The Team: Edison Carter, Theora Jones and Max

Edison Carter didn’t tilt at windmills, he was willing to go after any story and would not let it go no matter what pressure came down from above, because the truth needed to be told. Risking his life and career more than once to get the story, Edison Carter was the Man with the cam.

I know I fell head over heels for Max Headroom (and Edison Carter) when they first played Canada in my college days.

(Yes I’m >that< old.)

Max was fun, Edison was sexy.

Theora Jones showed us that women could succeed in the male dominated technology fields. Theora was an awesome role model for young women because she played her computer terminal like a Stradivarius. Theora’s ability to go anywhere and do whatever was needed– including hacking into parts of the net that are supposed to be off limits– made it possible for Edison Carter to get out there and do his job.

Theora Jones

Theora Jones was extremely smart, totally in control of her video/computer technology, and although clearly attracted to Edison she didn’t take any guff from the guy. Apparently the boys liked Theora… the ogg Theora video format was named for her.

For a brief taste of Max in action, Youtube has this Max Headroom new Coke commercial on offer.

What is incredible is that Max Headroom was ever made at all.

How many REALLY good science fiction TV series have there actually been? Not too many, that’s for sure. The science may not have been spot on, but Max Headroom was incredibly idea driven. The prescience of some of the Max Headroom storylines is almost frightening.

In the world of Max Headroom– which was set “20 minutes into the future”– if governments exist, they are at best ineffectual. In this future world it seems that governments have abdicated their power to the media giants. Max Headroom’s world is run by the TV networks.

Blank Reg: media pirate or freedom fighter?

Visually the series has a post apocalyptic look, but even in an urban wasteland populated by “blanks” (society’s drop outs who for one reason or another don’t have an identity number) there are TV sets set up and always running. Blank Reg and Dom broadcast their rogue video signal from their BigTime TV trailer… siphoning electricity and tapping into the internet (although the term has not been coined, the internet certainly exists here) to be able to connect with their freedom loving audience.

Our ostensible hero is Edison Carter, star reporter for one of the biggest networks, Network 23.

Although Network 23 gives a pretty good impression of running the world, they live in fear that their biggest account, the ZikZak corporation, will switch to a competing network.

The pilot is the story of Edison Carter’s exposé of the ZikZak “blipverts”, which have the annoying capability of causing the occasional television viewer to explode. Of course ZikZak doesn’t mind the occasional couch potato death, but Network 23 doesn’t want the story to come out. Since Edison is in fact investigating his own network, its actually his own company that attempts to kill him to get him off the story. The chase scene ends when Edison crashes head first into a parking garage barrier. The last words Edison sees are “Max Headroom”. When his mind is later electronically mined to discover just how much Edison Carter actually knows, Edison’s alter ego Max Headroom escapes into the computer network and assumes a virtual life of his own. Because Max Headroom is a virtual infant resident in the internet which connects the world’s computers and broadcasters, his character offers many ways to look at the world of big media and ask hard questions about where society is headed.

Max: all dressed up

Brilliant thought provoking science fiction. It showed us a world made up of:

• metro cops who seem to have no acquaintance with human rights,
• organ banks that can’t be bothered to check to see if the bodies delivered (by their version of Burke and Hare) are still breathing,
• a broadcast media imposing their will on the mainstream of society,
• along with a wretched marginalized underground society of blanks trying vainly to live in freedom.

In the 1980s it seemed that such a world could never exist. Human rights were a given.
George Orwell’s 1984 was a cautionary tale that could never come true.
We knew not to ever let things get to that point.

Didn’t we?

Max Headroom was cancelled. Max himself lived on for a bit as a Coke pitchman, but even Max couldn’t survive “New Coke”.

Unfortunately, Max Headroom has not been released on DVD. I was able to buy a beat-up second hand video of the British pilot from my local video store (which of course has switched to DVDs). The copyright owners have not chosen to try to release Max Headroom at this point. After all, there weren’t many episodes. They probably won’t make a lot of money from a DVD release. And because of copyright law, no one else can release Max Headroom.

What is incredible is that Max Headroom may be lost forever.

This is one of the tragic effects of copyright law: Max Headroom may disappear from the sum of human knowledge. And that would be a shame. Max Headroom had things to say in the 1980′s that would certainly bear repeating in the early 21st Century. Max Headroom was important to a lot of people. A great deal of creative work and thought and energy went into the creation of Max Headroom. Yet instead of protecting this wonderful work of intellectual property, misguided copyright law may consign it to oblivion.

Copyright law is currently undergoing changes around the world, as well as coming under a great deal of public scrutiny. In some jurisdictions, “due process” allows websites to be cut off of the internet connection purely because someone has made an accusation copyright infringement.

Shades of the French Revolution, Batman!
“J’accuse!”
Or Max Headroom, where due process can take the form of a game show.

One of the questions that the Canadian Copyright Consultation posed was:

“What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?”

– Canadian Copyright Consultation

Perhaps Canada could show clear headedness in stopping copyright law from being a liability to the works that it was created to protect.

Cory Doctorow's "Little Brother"

Canada also has a perfect opportunity to lead the world in international copyright reform. One of the reasons the media giants are leaning so heavily on our government to criminalize personal use copying is because they value the Canadian media market. Canada isn’t as inconsequential as the modern day equivalents of the ZikZak corporation would have us believe. If Canada went emphatically on record to decriminalize personal use copying, Canadian law enforcement resources would be freed up to be able to track actual criminal bootleggers.

Canada has an opportunity to lead the way.

Max Headroom would get along famously with M1k3y. My son loaned me his copy of Cory Doctorow’s Little Brother. Athough this excellent science fiction novel stars young adults and was written for a young adult audience, “Little Brother” is a rollicking good read even for old adults (which is to say any of us over twenty five). I’m still processing the new ideas it has introduced me to, and there is no chance I can give it a proper review without reading it again at least once more. But I would definitely recommend Little Brother to anyone. I’m planning to head out to hear Cory Doctorow speak at the University of Waterloo on Saturday.

You can check out Matt Frewer’s site , or catch up with the grown up Bryce…er Chris Young’s blog (the teen actor who played the American Bryce Lynch).

copyrightconsultation.ca

In reading through the submissions, one of my favorites would be this one:

Goos, Aaron

“1. How do Canada’s copyright laws affect you? How should existing laws be modernized?
Satire and parody are essential for democracy. Whether it’s legal or not, it will be done by many so it’s better to be on the right side of history on this issue. Also, fair dealing should be changed to fair use so people won’t be confused.

2. Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time
Remember that copyright was originally designed to be 7 years and expired. That was enough for the creator to make a profit before others could start too. A liberal and expansive copyright promotes innovation.”

—Aaron Goos

(I so admire people who can say so much in so few words!)

Mr. Goos reminds us that copyright originally expired after seven years. In my submission I thought copyright term reduction to twenty years would be good, but really, seven years is probably plenty long.

Canadians were asked to submit our thoughts, feelings and advice to our government’s Copyright Consultation process. This is why so many of us put so very much effort into our submissions. This was to be participatory democracy at its finest.

Thousands contributed.

Putting thoughts into words is easy for some but not most of us.
(This is why politicians hire speech writers).

Yet the copyright consultation website where industry canada is posting these submissions seems to have missed quite a few. I know that mine went in just in the nick of time. I personally know of two other submissions I’ve read that are also not evident on the September 14th page Nor is it on the page following.

I was led to believe that my government actually wanted to hear what I had to say.

We were led to believe that our government would actually listen.

The very few submissions posted on the site for the last few days open for submissions seem to have footnotes. If this is something that they want to do, fine. But only AFTER all of the submissions are posted. Considering that email submissions are submitted electronically, I don’t understand what is taking so long.

Canadians want to be sure that our submissions were received, not lost or inadvertently destroyed.

If they have been damaged or misplaced, we will want the opportunity to re-submit, because we have all put in a lot of work on this. We want to make sure that we are heard.

Luckily so many of us have posted online.

Google found me these insightful copycon submissions:

Blaise Alleyne: Unity Behind Diversity

Denver Gingerich: A Better World

Scott Elcomb: Libertatia Canada

Andrew Currie: Scribd

Todd Howe: Aleatoric

Cory Doctorow: Submission to the Canadian Copyright Consultation

Cory Doctorow’s reference to the “You wouldn’t steal a car” shorts put me in mind of this very funny anti-piracy parody clip from Britain’s Channel 4 comedy series “The I.T.Crowd”

I hope that they will make some kind of announcement as to why so many copycon submissions are not visible. Perhaps the best thing at this point would be for the government to let Professor Geist know what’s happening so that he can spread the word,

O Canada copyright consultation

Picnic in Victoria Glen Park: Sunday

Elmira’s Victoria Glen Park continues to be at risk, because it has been declared “surplus” by the local politicians, who expect to make enough money from selling this forest to developers to help pay for the municipality’s new Rec Center. It seems incredible that they would sacrifice a nature preserve complete with a thriving ecosystem and natural drainage in order to pay for a few buildings that politicians in another 30 years will likely feel it necessary to replace.

A residents group has sprung up to try to stop this from happening. They hope to convince the Town Council to rezone the park to ensure it is preserved for the enjoyment of future generations. They’re hosting a Picnic there tomorrow. Neighbors, residents and hikers are encouraged to bring their own litterless liunch for a picnic and learn about Victoria Glen from long time residents. Local historian Ruth Josephs will be on hand to regale participants with stories of the area’s past. Anyone interested will be encouraged to walk the paths and collect any stray litter.

Mother Nature approves: the Environment Canada forecast is good:
“Sunny. Increasing cloudiness in the evening. High 24.”

I wrote about Victoria Glen Park earlier this year in “It’s Not Easy Being Green”

copycon extension

(Note: This is a reposting of http://stopusagebasedbilling.wordpress.com/2009/09/15/canadian-copyright-consultation-extension/)

Although the Consultation is officially closed, there is a 48 hour grace period to allow Canadians to be heard, so you can still speak your piece up until midnight tonight, September 15th, 2009.

A good website for assistance in the mechanics of submitting your opinions is http://faircopy.ca/

The official government website is http://copyright.econsultation.ca/

But all you really need to do is send them an email at:

info@copyrightconsultation.gc.ca

The questions to answer are:

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?

I’ve posted my submission in the wind. Feel free to use any of my words & ideas that might help you express your opinions.

The other two sites that have helped me sort out my thoughts are

• Bob Jonkman’s This Blog is Not For Reading which is very comprehensive and has a lot of good ideas, and
• Michael Geist’s public service blog http://www.speakoutoncopyright.ca/

Some of us noisy types have written a lot, but you don’t have to. Just tell them what you think. Canadians need to speak up if we want to be heard.

STOP Usage Based Billing

Just under the wire: My Copycon Submission

I just completed and submitted my submission for the Canadian Copyright Consultation. Complete and unabridged:

My name is Laurel L. Russwurm, and I’m a Sheridan College Media Arts Graduate who went on to write drama and children’s programs in the Canadian television industry. Currently I am in the process of returning to the world of words following a prolonged stint as a full time parent.

Questions

1 How do Canada’s copyright laws affect you?

As a writer it particularly bothers me when I read of “lost works”. There are many books that I know exist but I’ve never been able to actually find. Books that are now out of print. I will probably never find many of them. It saddens me that I may never get to read them. As a writer it upsets me more to think that some of those books will eventually cease to exist. Many already have because they were confined by copyright, and they were not important enough to keep in print. No one will ever have the opportunity to read them. That loss is a loss to the sum of human knowledge and I find it indescribably sad.

The argument can be made that the books that go out of print and stay out of print were unpopular, so perhaps they deserve to go out of print. I would have to disagree. As someone who re-reads books, a book is different the second time around because the reader is different. Popularity isn’t always an indicator of what stands the test of time, it may simply be due to a fad.

Terms of copyright have been getting longer and longer. In many cases the “popular” book isn’t always the one that can stand the test of time, sometimes the true classic is positively overlooked initially. I expect publishers find it advantageous to keep only best selling books in print. By keeping the slow starters out of print, traditionally the public has been forced to choose from a shallower pool.

Allowing copyright to survive the death of the creator strikes me as absurd. Allowing copyright to continue seventy years after the death of the creator is inconceivable. This practice is bad for the public, because we may in fact not get a chance to read, see or hear the work. Ever. As an writer, I want my work to be out there.

Canada’s copyright laws affect me as a Canadian citizen, consumer, mother, and writer, coming from a family of writers, artists, programmers, and musicians.

The impact of copyright can be felt in both Canadian culture and the Canadian economy. As a citizen my ability to access Canadian writing, art, photography, music and software is important. As a consumer the copyright laws impact on what I can and can not do with things that I have accessed or purchased. As a mother the copyright laws impact not only on the Canadian culture I expose my child to, but will also affect my child’s future pursuits. These consultations may well change the world he will inherit. As a writer, copyright should neither hinder my ability to access research or disseminate my work.

The single most important change should be a reduction of Canada’s copyright term to no more than twenty years. In particular, since copyright is supposed to protect the rights of the creator, there is no reason why copyright should continue after the creator’s death. I have heard no reasonable explanation as to why the term of copyright is so much longer than the term of patent.

It should be the right of any Canadian creator of intellectual property to place that work directly into the public domain on creation.

If a publisher allows a work to go out of print, or if a distributor stops actively distributing art, music, movies or software, this is an act of overt non-distribution which acts to effectively to suppress dissemination of the intellectual property. Copyright law should allow the creator of this work the right to place it directly into the public domain regardless of contractual obligation, because absent this relief this kind of artificial suppression of the work could well damage the creator’s ability to generate future income.

2. Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time

As technology has changed Canadian consumers have had a hard time understanding what is legally allowable. Canadian cable service providers openly encouraged Canadian viewers to “time shift”(videotaping the movie in conflict with the favorite TV show).

Then came the CD levy. Canadians pay a levy on every blank CD we buy, which is supposed to be divided among Canadian recording artists. Although I can’t speak for anyone else, the bulk of the blank CDs I’ve purchased have been used to back up my hard drives, not record downloaded music, so most of the levy money collected from me has been collected unjustly. Within the existing CIPPIC system there is little chance that the musicians whose work I enjoy will receive any of the levy money, since I tend to buy my music direct from the artist and never willingly listen to the radio.

These two things clearly send the message that personal use copying is permissible in Canada. The very existence of the CD levy was a government acknowledgment of the perceived Canadian right to legally make copies of music for our personal use.

The world has changed, and how we get exposed to works has changed too. When radio was new, the content providers had no problem with people listening to their content. When TV came along that content too was offered free of charge.

I stopped listening to the radio years ago because my tastes were not reflected in the music that got air play. I would rather listen to my own recordings than have to put up with hours of music I don’t like in the hopes of getting one song I do. So there are limits on how music can reach me. My exposure to new music is through attendance of festivals and concerts, and occasionally listening to downloaded music.

Yet if the lawmakers enact new legislation explicitly stating that listening to downloaded music is illegal, as a good Canadian I’ll stop listening tp downloaded music. That would hurt new Canadian recording artists because the only opportunity they will have to bring their music to my attention will be by performing a live show I might attend in my geographical location. If I don’t, I’ll never know their music, so I’m unlikely to buy any.

When Canadians listen to downloaded music it actually benefits recording artists.

Canadian copyright law should state explicitly that personal use is allowed. Peer to peer file sharing should also be explicitly legal. Copyright law must clearly state that commercial infringement is a criminal act. Instead of criminalizing citizens for activities that have been encouraged and allowed by both distributors and government, the law should be focusing on the real criminals who are mass producing counterfeit copies of music and movies.

SAFETY COPIES

I have purchased the same music on records, eight track tapes, cassette tapes, and CD’s. I have purchased movies on video tape and again on DVD. Now there is a new kind of DVD. As a consumer I am tired of buying the same movies over and over again. I am tired of buying the same music over and over again.

No one told us that eight track tapes would become obsolete. Maybe that should have been the tip off about video tapes. Even worse, is the deterioration. Videotape is aging fast, and I’ve had enough commercial CDs and DVDs fail that I know that they won’t last forever. Yet it may be illegal under Canadian law for me to copy this material.

Why is it that consumers are expected to pay for the same movies or music over and over again. When I buy a book, I don’t have to buy it again a few years down the road. I am legally allowed to lend it out, and resell it. Copyright should not prevent consumers from copying the their own media for their own use so that it will last for a reasonable length of time.

DRM/TPM

Technology is changing so rapidly it is dangerous to try to micromanage it. DRM (Digital Rights Management), and TPM (Technical Protection Measures) attempts to control our use of both hardware and software and in the process cripple the use of such software.

As a Sheridan College Media Arts graduate I am well aware of the principles of editing. Yet I have been frustrated by commercial video editing software when attempting to edit my home movies. I had to purchase two different programs before being able to even burn one home movie DVD. Even so, I have ended with an absurd proportion of spoiled DVDs that either won’t play in my DVD player, or if they do they won’t play in a relative’s DVD player. The point of making home movies is to be able to share them with family members, many of whom are not computer literate. Anyone should be able to put their home movie DVD in their DVD player and play it.

But because of DRM and TPM the hardware and software are crippled to the point of preventing the software from working well, if at all. So legitimate purchaser and users can’t use them easily. The supposed point of DRM and TPM is to stop media piracy. The unfortunate effect is that the media pirates have the equipment and expertise to circumvent these supposed “protections” while the law abiding citizens can’t make use of legally purchased software.

A new computer owner I know was frustrated by an operating system which refused to allow her to put her own digital photographs directly from her own digital camera onto her new computer because the operating system insisted she didn’t have copyright to these images.

When we purchase hardware and software, we assume that we will be able to use it as much as we want until it wears out or breaks. However, like everyone else, I’ve purchased both hardware and software that I should still be able to use, but can’t. In some cases the manufacturer has stopped manufacturing or supporting the product. Or has gone out of business.

All we consumers know is that something we’ve paid for doesn’t work anymore through no fault of our own.

It may be something as simple as suddenly not being able to get the printer drivers for WordPerfect. So software purchased in good faith that still works can no longer perform the necessary functions. Maybe your printer is programmed to stop accepting ink after a certain point, whether the cartridge is actually empty or not. When you discover the cartridges are no longer for sale and you find out that new printer was such a good deal because its been discontinued, even refilling your cartridges doesn’t work because the printer’s programming won’t allow it. The programming tells the printer that the cartridge is empty even if its full.

DRM/TPM programming consigns all this perfectly good hardware and software that should still work properly for years in the landfill.

Perhaps we need legislation to ensure a minimum timeframe for corporations to support their software and hardware, beginning from the last day of Canadian product sale. Say, twenty years?

Far better for Canadian Copyright law to specify that circumvention of DRM and TPM is allowed under Canadian law. The dissemination of knowledge and tools to perform the circumvention must also be legally protected.

If companies wish to practice DRM/TPM that’s up to them, and given a choice I’ll buy the one that doesn’t use it. But if there’s no choice consumers must have the right under law to have the thing reverse engineered to keep it working.

3. What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster innovation and creativity in Canada?

The most important thing for any artist or creator, is for people to see, read, hear or use our creations. Certainly, deriving income from the work is reasonable, and necessary. But not as important as allowing the art to be disseminated.

Throughout my life there has been talk of the lack of a “Canadian identity” and the dearth of “Canadian culture”. These problems are intertwined. Canadian culture develops as Canadian arts flourish. Artists give voice to the underlying culture and our voices must be heard.

In my youth Canadians were offered precious little exposure to Canadian art, music or movies in spite of or perhaps because of Canadian Content regulations. Canadian culture was at an impasse because it was controlled by the large media companies. Most creators who were not chosen by the big media concerns fell by the wayside. Because if no one reads the words you write, if no one sees the pictures you paint, if no one hears the music you make or watches your film, art won’t flourish. Artists of every kind need an audience.

The more people can see, hear or read the work the greater the chance that the artist will find an audience. A long term of copyright is not conducive to the dissemination of art, because it limits and curtails the free dissemination of the work. It does not help the artist. The single most important thing to any artist starting out is to have their work seen, heard or read.

Right now is probably the very best time for all of the Canadian arts thanks to the internet. Internet access has made the dissemination of works of art extraordinarily easy. Any artist is free to find their own market.

Some publishers and distributors may feel threatened by this, because suddenly they are no longer the sole arbiter of what art will be disseminated. They no longer need to spend vast sums of money to disseminate the artist’s works while the artist is getting established, so they are losing the ability to control the art. Artificial control of art is not good for artists or culture. Certainly the old system made for some very big success stories, but there were many more failures. Even worse, we have quite probably lost out on some amazing Canadian art over the years because the artists were prevented from even getting in the game.

The good publishers and distributors will benefit by this new way of doing business, because once they are successful, artists would rather pursue their art than waste their valuable creative time and energy in publishing and distributing their work. Artists will continue to need publishers and distributors to do the work of publishing and distributing, but now there is a greater chance of entering into mutually beneficial agreements.

Canadians are publishing a vast amount of their words in blogs. Canadians are distributing great quantities of their photographs on internet photo sharing services. Canadians are sharing their home videos. In the new model of commercial music young Canadian musicians won’t have to suffer the back breaking struggle Stompin’ Tom Connors did in order to become a Canadian recording superstar. The tools provided by the internet help Canadian musicians self promote and self publish their music and distribute it online. And they are finding their audiences.

Any Copyright laws that interfere with this will stifle innovation and creativity in Canada.

4. What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster competition and investment in Canada?

A free copyright registry would be an invaluable service to Canada. As well as identifying all Canadian copyrighted works it should register works that are in the public domain. Once in place, it would make it easy to determine who holds the copyright on any Canadian work, which would certainly make it easier for interested parties to license Canadian intellectual properties.

More importantly, we need to ensure that Canadian works of intellectual property don’t fall through the cracks and become lost simply because copyright status can’t currently be determined. That is the last thing any creator would ever want to happen.

Public domain intellectual properties are an important resource. Creation of derivative works can be a good thing. However, once a work is in the public domain it should not be possible for it to be removed and copyrighted by any one.

CROWN COPYRIGHT

Crown Copyright should be abolished. Since taxpayer dollars are used to generate these works they should be freely accessible. Digital media and the internet render physical publishing costs a non-issue. This Canadian material could be released under Canadian copyright law approximating a creative commons “attribution only” license. It would certainly be in Canada’s best interest for our government to follow the lead of our American neighbors on this.

PARODY

Canadian comedians and writers have lead the world in parody and satire. Incredible in light of Canadian copyright law. Perhaps if there were parody and satire exemptions to Canadian copyright law allowing these uses to be legal in Canada then some of our future stars would stay home.

5. What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?

In order for Canada to have a hope of being a leader in the global digital economy, all decisions about copyright must be home grown. Under no circumstances should our copyright laws be dictated by foreign interests. This consultation would prove to be an exercise in futility should there even be an appearance of pandering to a foreign lobby.

To lead in a global digital world Canada needs to allow her artists, musicians, film makers, programmers and writers to make full and effective use of the available technology.

A copyright term that runs for twenty years would make it possible for intellectual property to enter the public domain in the author’s lifetime. So the book that I write this year would go into the public domain in twenty years. At that time a publisher who might not have been able to afford afford to license my new work will be able to publish my old work. Because the material is now in the public domain, the publisher can retail the work for a much lower cost. Any time works are disseminated in a new way or a different market they have the opportunity to add to the audience. So although I will not receive license fees for this publication, it will nevertheless increase the market for my new material.

It does a writer no good to have dormant works protected under copyright. Having the term of copyright continue for fifty years after my death may support my estate, but is does me no good. In fact, by preventing my work from being disseminated, the end result may well be that my work is lost. Works in the public domain are more likely to survive.

I don’t see any good justification for the term of copyright to exceed a term of patent.

Copyright law is intended to benefit those who create, whether it is written work, fine artwork, photography, written music, recorded media or software. The voices of the creators of works of intellectual property should have far more weight than the voices of those who have traditionally made money from our creations.

Sincerely,
Laurel L. Russwurm

CC The Hon. James Moore, MP, Minister of Canadian Heritage
CC The Hon. Tony Clement, MP, Minister of Industry
CC The Hon. Harold Albrecht, MP

CC submissions@faircopy.ca

Copycon

This is just a quick note to remind you of the Canadian Copyright consultation that’s underway right now.

In case you aren’t aware of it, the Canadian government is soliciting Canadian input on how we feel the copyright laws should be updated. You can write a little or a lot. But it’s important that we make use of opportunities like this.

Some links that may give you an idea of the issues (and most don’t mind cutting and pasting their good ideas– why they would be posting them after all) include this Bob Jonkman’s This Blog is Not For Reading which is very comprehensive and has a lot of good ideas.

Then there’s Michael Geist’s public service blog http://www.speakoutoncopyright.ca/

and of course the place you go to answer the questions:

http://copyright.econsultation.ca/topics-sujets/show-montrer/18

I’ve just cut to the chase on that one… I actually started reading through all the stuff a few weeks back and was dejected at all the industry types trying to beef up copyright stuff. As a writer from a family of artists I think 20 years should more than be enough. Like many writers and artists, I think having the work exist and survive is the important thing. (After all, we all know that we aren’t likely to be able to make a living at it anyway!)

The sad part is that the thing is due tomorrow or today actually, midnight Sunday September 13, 2009.

I’m off to put my two bits in. This message will self destruct in…. oops, is that one covered under copyright?

(any egregious errors are due to the fact that I am not proofing this… gotta write]

Biographies: My Top Five

My love of storytelling is probably why my favorite non-fiction reading has always been biography. I first remember delving into biography when I was in High School, I was a voracious reader, and so was on the lookout for new areas of interest once I’d already exhausted all the mystery, historical and science fiction in the school library.

Biographies can be a much more accessible way to learn about history because the subject is essentially a protagonist. I expect this is why A&E’s Biography show was so successful. For me though, a one hour segment is too superficial. I much prefer reading a book.

All biographies are not created equal. Some are easy to read and some are hard work. One of my favorite fiction writers wrote one of the most unreadable autobiographies I’ve ever tried to read. Autobiographers must not only list facts, they need to open up to the reader (or at least leave the reader feeling that they have). Most of the biographies I’ve read have been good, some for telling about an interesting life, some for being well written.

In fact I’m old enough that if I find myself halfway through a biography that hasn’t engaged me I’ll put it down. Life is too short and there is too much good stuff to read.

Of all the biographies I’ve read (and I’ve a heap I have yet to read), these are my favorites. I haven’t read any of them for quite a while, but they will all be re-read at least once more.

Orson Welles:
A Biography by Barbara Leaming

Undoubtedly a brilliant man, Welles frightened the world with an alien invasion on radio, was the radio voice of “The Shadow”, angered one of the most powerful men in the world with his cinema masterpiece “Citizen Kane” and he married Rita Hayworth. Orson Welles was an incredibly interesting guy, This biography is one of the weirdest biography/autobiographies I’ve ever found, but it was delicious. It’s hard to describe, but it’s a kind of cat and mouse game between the biographer and the formidable Mr. Welles. Well worth a read.

Agatha Christie: An Autobiography

I discovered Agatha Christie mysteries when I first started reading for fun in my teens. Inadvertently beginning with her first book (“The Secret Adversary”), Christie’s books were easy to lay hands on my an older sister was a big Miss Marple fan. So I read everything she wrote that I could find. Over the years I’ve heard people denigrate Christie’s writing as being simple and formulaic. Having gone back and re-read many of her books, I disagree. She did invent a kind of formula, but the stories were not formulaic. Her writing stands up today on re-reading as being just as good as I remember it.

When I discovered that my Dad had found her autobiography at a yard sale, I borrowed it. It was if anything more incredible reading than any one of her books. She led an interesting life. In fact, she opened up and shared herself enough that I felt I got to know her as a person not an abstraction. I loved this autobiography so much that I made a point of not returning it to my Dad until I’d gotten my hands on a copy for myself.

(That was in the days when you couldn’t be sure of finding the missing used books for your collection on http://www.abebooks.com, http://www.amazon.ca or http://www.ebay.ca/.

To the Stars: George Takei

The trekkie in me bought this book but it was a very good read. Mr. Takei is a brilliant and engaging man, and he writes very well indeed. The thing that I was totally unprepared for was the dynamite buried in his childhood.

As a Japanese American Takei spent a chunk of his World War II childhood in an American Detention Camp. He manages to both minimize the horrors with the breeziness of childhood resilience, but at the same time the adult writer in him makes the evil of the whole exercise very clear. Very heavy in parts, but worth it.

I actually encouraged my ten year old to read it for the first person account of history.  And George Takei’s ability to look at life with wry wit makes the later bits both interesting and readable.

And of course all of Mr. Sulu’s fans will get a huge kick out of the behind the scenes Star Trek gossip.  It is a good solid biography, though, not mere fan fare.

You can visit http://www.georgetakei.com/ to catch up with him nowadays.

Tracy and Hepburn: An Intimate Memoir
by Garson Kanin

This one is a little bit different because it is a biography of a couple. Written by their friend, writer/director Garson Kanin, this is the story of the bitter sweet off-screen relationship of Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn.

The combination of societies mores and his own catholic upbringing prevented movie star Spenser Tracy from divorcing his wife to marry Hepburn

Kanin makes it clear in this biography that had circumstances been different these two would have been happily married.

Kanin’s connection with his friends combined with his story telling ability brings his subjects alive, making this a very accessible read.

Stompin’ Tom: Before The Fame
by Stompin’ Tom Connors

Stompin’ Tom Connors is a Canadian icon. He was the first performer to actually write songs about Canada because he wanted to. And once begun, he wrote song after song about this land of ours. He does not have a beautiful singing voice, but his songs are incredibly engaging. Many of them cause me to laugh out loud.

Stompin’ Tom is a consummate showman, the ultimate self made man. But more than anyone living, Stompin’ Tom has given Canadians an identity to hang their hats on. I doubt that there’s a Canadian alive who has NOT heard of this man. Certainly every Canadian performing artist knows his name.

Connors travelled back and forth across Canada making a living as an entertainer, which is where he amassed his storehouse of material for songs and stories. But no record label would record him. So he recorded himself.

After becoming successful and even internationally known, incredibly Stompin Tom went on to do battle with dragons to fight for Canadian Content regulations to protect and support the young entertainers coming up after him. Pure class.

Of course, that’s not what this first volume of his autobiography is about. It’s about the hellacious childhood that the boy born Tommy Messer survived. It’s about a child torn from a young mother who had no support in a world without effective help for its weakest citizens. Its about injustice and hope.

This is probably the best biography I’ve ever read because Connors brings you right into his childhood, and makes you feel what it was like. The fact that he spoke so candidly and honestly about things that obviously hurt him deeply is why this book was such a mega hit in Canada. He made people understand.

I am amazed that this man has been able to accomplish so much in his life after the childhood he endured. He has survived and has triumphed, and has principles he believes in and stands up for. Stompin’ Tom Connors is willing and able to work selflessly for the betterment of the community. He’s downright inspirational.

Canada Post just honored Stompin’ Tom by putting him on a stamp.

But it was this biography that made Stompin’ Tom my hero.

Visit http://stompintom.com/