A string of worldwide protests against digital rights management (DRM) technologies are scheduled to kick off today around the world as angry consumers take action against technology and media companies.

The protests, which aim to boost public awareness of restrictive new media distribution technologies, are being coordinated by the Free Software Foundation's anti-DRM initiative, Defective By Design.

According to the organisation, many new media products from the likes of Microsoft, Apple and Intel have been intentionally crippled from the users' perspective, and are therefore "defective by design".

Hundreds of supporters have already pledged to take action across a wide cross-section of the world's cities from Washington to Tel-Aviv, with most activities focusing on dissemination of leaflets to the public and "stickering" displays of products in shops deemed to be "defective".

Defective By Design organisers have pledged to award prizes for some of the best ideas, actions, photos and videos taking place on the day.

One US supporter has suggested "Googlebombing" the term "DRM". To achieve this, he has asked all participants to include a link to a dedicated DRM site he has created through any blogs or articles they write with the goal of making it the top Google entry for all DRM searches.

Although no actions have been listed for Australian capital cities, a group in Coffs Harbour, NSW, has launched The Shackled Banana award to coincide with the event. The award will identify "the individual or organisation who has been judged to have done the most in the past 12 months to employ technical and/or legal means to restrict the freedom of the residents of the Coffs Coast to actively participate in their culture and society".

Entries were judged at the next ClubLinux Coffs Harbour meeting on 1st October, and attempts to present the award to the winner or their local representative will be made today.

DRM technology is being increasingly incorporated into digital music, films and computer games in a bid to thwart copyright infringement by setting certain limits on duplication, and the devices on which content can be played. However protesters believe that the same technology is also being used to restrict the legal rights of users, preventing content from being played on a wide range of devices, as in the case of music purchased through the iTunes music store.

The Defective by Design campaign aims to identify what it considers "defective" products, and target them for elimination to make all manufacturers wary about bringing their DRM-enabled products to market.

In June it coordinated action across eight US cities with supporters dressed in bright yellow Hazmat suits swarming Apple Stores to warn shoppers and staff that Apple iTunes was infected with DRM.

A similar protest in May targeted Microsoft developers attending the company's annual conference, and the most recent action was an appeal for supporters to sign a petition calling upon U2 lead singer, Bono, to take a stand against DRM.

Michael Geist, a retiring member of the CIRA (Canadian Internet Registration Authority,) which is responsible for all the '.ca' domains, has wrapped up his '30 Days of DRM' series. The series was meant, among other things, to highlight the downfalls of DRM through actual examples and well thought out arguments.

His series started exactly 30 days before the Canadian government returned to parliament. The reason for this is because it is expected that the well talked about Copyright reform bill will be discussed and tabled. Many remember the last Copyright reform bill (Bill C-60) as a controversial piece of legislation that died on the order paper. It is rumoured that the copyright reform bill this time around will be a priority for the current Canadian government.

Some remain optimistic that this reform bill will prove to be far less controversial then the previous copyright reform bill. The reasoning behind this is because a large number of organizations and interest groups have sent multiple letters pressuring the government, more often than not, to have a much more relaxed copyright law set in place. Many of those organizations and groups, including Telus, have pushed for Network neutrality and a provision more in line with the US's "Fair Use" provision which was set in the American court system at the end of the Betamax trial.

Other groups and organizations appear to be much more neutral. These groups appear to call for anti-circumvention laws that do not harm consumers in ways demonstrated by the Sony MediaMax/Rootkit fiasco (which was recently settled - though not without controversy.)

Some groups took to the other side and have demanded for anti-circumvention laws with "Notice-and-Takedown" provisions as well as ratification of the WIPO treaties to "play catch-up" (WIPO has also landed in recent controversy.)

The "30 Days of DRM" takes a look at many aspects of DRM. It goes into marketing, monopolies, competition, consumer rights, and many more aspects. The days are numbered from 1 - 30 respectively in the following:

1. Linking Copyright and Anti-Circumvention (Markets)
2. Region Coding (Markets)
3. Oversight of DRM Misuse (Markets)
4. DRM Misuse Sanctions (Markets)
5. DRM Labelling and Consumer Awareness (Public Protection)
6. Interoperability (Public Protection and Markets)
7. DRM-Free Library Deposits (Public Protection)
8. Privacy (Circumvention Rights)
9. Reverse Engineering (Circumvention Rights)
10. Security Research (Circumvention Rights)
11. Involuntary Installation of Software (Circumvention Rights)
12. Research and Private Study (Circumvention Rights)
13. Criticism, Review and News Reporting (Circumvention Rights)
14. Private Copying (Circumvention Rights)
15. Artistic Access (Circumvention Rights)
16. System Repair (Circumvention Rights)
17. Broken or Obsolete Technology (Circumvention Rights)
18. Backup Copies of Software (Circumvention Rights)
19. Backup Copies of Digital Consumer Products (Circumvention Rights)
20. Public Domain (Circumvention Rights)
21. Print Disabilities (Circumvention Rights)
22. Libraries (Circumvention Rights)
23. Education Institutions (Circumvention Rights)
24. Time Shifting (Circumvention Rights)
25. Statutory Obligations (Circumvention Rights)
26. Investigation of Concealed Code (Circumvention Rights)
27. Government Works (DRM Policy)
28. Review of New Circumvention Rights (Circumvention Rights)
29. No Ban on Circumvention Devices (Foundational Issue)
30. Prohibition on Contractual Circumvention of Rights (Foundational Issue)

A wiki page is also offered here.

It has been a long and interesting 30 days. Now it seems it'll only be a matter of time before the proposed legislation for copyright is revealed. It'll answer the burning questions many have had for a long time. What is the current government stance on Copyright? What will the bill look like? These are but a couple of many questions on many people’s minds as the government take their seats in Ottawa. After the conclusion of the running series, many hope the Copyright legislation will prove to be favourable, but it is unlikely to fully satisfy all sides given how many different sides to the issue there really are.

It was predicted that a Copyright reform bill in Canada would occur sometime during the current session of the Canadian parliament. Michael Geist certainly predicted this when he ended his 30 Days of DRM the day this session started up. For some time, many people were trying to find some hint in to what Bev Oda - the Minister of Heritage who also is a key player in Copyright reform - might be planning for this next copyright reform bill. Look hard enough and it can be noted that she did make subtle responses to questions on things like TPM (Technical Protection Management) and copyright reform. Recently, she made another response.

The first known response was back in April. In that response, she was quoted, "The copyright legislation that was introduced by the previous government, once it was tabled, it did die on the order paper, but once it was tabled created a lot of dissension. There were different views on many elements of that bill. Consequently we are working and we will be introducing a new copyright bill that will expedite meeting our international obligations but also making sure that we have a copyright regime and a copyright framework that's appropriate."

One thing was certain by that response, they recognized the controversy in the last copyright reform bill. In essence, she also mentions speeding up to meet international obligations. What she meant by that isn't so clear. Did she mean that she would ratify the WIPO treaties? Did she mean something else entirely? Is she noting CRIA's (Canadian Recording Industry Association) problems that boiled over not a week later and listening to different sources? Is she merely listening to CRIA? Is she listening to a voice somewhere in between? These questions seem to have no real answers.

Two months later, a report depicted the Minister of Heritage meeting with groups like CRIA privately. The "secret meeting" drew some worry from advocates. The meeting took place two months before the transcript was unearthed by Howard Knopf.

Two months after the report on the "secret meeting", Appropriation Art too received a response. In it, Bev says, "Government officials will continue to monitor developments around the world as they plan the next steps that Canada will take on this matter. The Government wants to ensure that the rights of Canadian creators are adequately protected by law, and that these rights are balanced with the ability of the public to access and make use of these works." Appropriation Art was frustrated by the response and said that "the Minister’s response is unacceptable."

It is also noteworthy that at the end of July, Maxime Bernier, the Minister of Industry, also made a response which seems to have some similarities to Bev Oda's letter: "Please be assured that I am working closely with my colleague, Minister Oda, to ensure that the Act reflects current technological and legal realities, and is supportive of innovation and research. I am also mindful of the fact that the Act must ensure a balance between adequate protection for copyright holders and reasonable access to copyrighted material."

Fast forward three months to today. The minister made a response on the issue of TPM's that found its way on to Digital Copyright Canada. "The letter from the Minister of Heritage did not address my question. The issue of technical protection measures is not really an issue of copyright at all, but an issue of property rights of owners of technology." Writes Russell, "The letter my MP received also has the date of July 7, 2006. If you also received a mildly modified version of this letter, I would be interested to know."

Slyck caught up with Russell for his take on the issue. "It isn't puzzled. It is very worried. I am not hearing anything from the new minister on issues related to copyright since she was elected. This letter was not a reply, but a mildly modified form letter that her staff would have put together. It had just enough uniqueness to make it appear that someone read the letter it replied to, but not much more." Explained Russell, "The new Industry minister is both silent and unknown, and Bev Oda is now silent, leaving us to guess that the Conservative direction could be similar to what Heritage committee had come up with in the past."

Russell isn't the only one worried. Michael Geist, who built a reputation of obtaining a lot of valuable information in the past also showed concern.

As for who is being heard more - consumers and industry based on newer models as opposed to businesses using more traditional models - Russell expressed some doubt that consumers are winning the ear of the ministers, " Mr. Rajotte's recent letter is far more interesting than Ms. Oda's letter. It clearly was personal, and had the formal "Mr. McOrmond" scratched out and "Russell" written in by hand, with an additional personal "Hope you are well. James" added in at the end. [source]

He is the current chair of Industry committee. When he speaks of me commenting and appearing to testify, is he suggesting it will be a special legislative committee to deal with this specific bill? I don't
think he would be suggesting that Heritage committee would allow anyone other than their traditional stakeholders to testify, given this has historically not happened."

Russell also said, "Any new copyright bill *must* be debated outside of Heritage committee, given the divisions on this issue are more across committee lines than party lines. This is with the exception of the NDP which *currently* has a forward-facing Heritage critic in Charlie Angus, very different than their past critic that towed the "Heritage" party line."

These responses were nothing what many advocates were hoping for. Not only does it seem to not answer many questions being raised, but it also seems to raise new questions as well. Exactly what will copyright reform look like, that'll be something that remains to be seen. That day, some speculate, may be approaching very soon.

It's an advocates dream come true. News that sales have never been better in a country where the record industry associated with labels like EMI is in a "moral vacuum." Many would say that this is living proof that downloading music for free not only doesn't hurt the record industry, but stimulate growth in music sales. That is, of course, according to a report recently published by Canadian Heritage. This is coupled with another recent report that the Bare Naked Ladies sales on the latest album sky-rocketted under a new business model.

The latest report states, "Canadian artists have seen their sales increase since 2001. Sales of Canadian albums have increased from 6.8 million units in 2001 to 8.5 million in 2004, an increase of 25.3%1. In contrast, foreign artists have seen their sales fall 20.2% over the same period. The result is a remarkable increase in Canadian artists’ share of sales in Canada from 16% in 2001 to 25% in 2004."

Does this further collapse the argument that downloading hurts artists? Not really. Generally, it's difficult to impossible to guage whether an increase or decrease has anything to do with file-sharing as many other factors come in to play. As with the drops along with the rises, radio, large chain stores, etc. all play important factors in the rise tied with how the economy is doing and how much consumers are making. With too many factors to take in to account, it seems likely that file-sharing is merely a drop in the bucket in the otherall music industry... or is it?

The report goes on to say, "Teenage consumers are the most frequent users of digital music services, a 2005 Decima Research survey has found, with 23% of 15 to 20 year olds having bought music in 2004-05 compared with 11% of Canadians overall; teens also continue to be the most likely to download music for free."

So how good is Canadian music? According to Canadians "The survey also found that 93% of Canadians feel music by Canadian artists to be equal or superior to music by international artists."

One Canadian band might have fans that agree as the Bare Naked Ladies saw their latest album nearly get 1 million dollars in sales recently.

Not surprisingly, digital music stores saw a growth in sales. "Early sales figures from Canada’s emerging digital music market are also encouraging. Three of the four digital music services in Canada report selling 3.9 million individual tracks and 330,000 albums in the first ten months of 2005. Although the latter figure represents just 1% of total album sales over that period."

It seems to be a sharp contrast to the infamous firestorm over the Pollara study back in March where the industry was quoted in saying that the Canadian music industry is on "an almost decade-long [downward] spiral."

What are Canadians listening to? The report states, "Sales of popular music and rock recordings accounted for 66.7% of the $709 million in total sales in 2003, falling 24.1% between 2000 and 2003, from $623 million to $473 million. Classical recordings accounted for 7.8% of total sales, jazz and blues for 6.9%, country and folk albums for 6.8%, children’s records for 2% and other categories for 9.8%." So, while rock is still hot, it's dominence is slipping to other genres of music including folk, classical and even dance.

The report also went into detail over statistics gathered for downloading music for free, "Despite the growth of legal online music services over the past year, free downloads outpaced online sales of music files by a wide margin among all age groups. Among respondents with Internet access, 30% said they downloaded free music tracks, compared with 11% who bought tracks online. Teenagers are the top downloaders, with 68% of those aged 15 to 20 saying they downloaded tracks for free last year and 23% making at least one online purchase." This might be an indication that 'try before you buy' is something practiced by Canadians.

Canadians are also said be be attending concerts: "Live Music Performances Two thirds of Canadians saw live music performances last year, with 46% attending one to five concerts, 11% attending six to 10, and 11% attending more than 10 concerts. Performances by Canadian artists made up approximately three quarters of all concerts attended.

"Around 29% of concert attendees bought CDs or DVDs at the shows and 19% bought other concertrelated merchandise."

Another point of interest is the IFPI's take in music sales in Canada: "The world recording market’s retail value declined 1.3% in 2004, to $33.6 billion, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). Of the top 10 sound recording markets in the world, only three – Canada, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) – showed an increase in unit sales. And only the US, representing 36% of the world sound recording market, showed an increase in dollar value of sales in 2004." This too was in sharp contrast to their earlier report which states: "For Canada’s music industry, the rise of file swapping has coincided with a 42 percent – or CAD$558 million – decrease in annual retail sales between 1999 and 2005" Why the conflicting data straight from the horses mouth is debateable. Either way, it seems to debunk the earlier report just like how CRIA's opinion citing the Pollara study was seemingly debunked when released in full. Has history repeated itself?

Canadian Heritage's report seems to paint one of the most positive pictures to date on the Canadian music market. With artists forming groups like the Canadian Music Creators Association tied with Copyright laws that allow music to be downloaded legally, who knows? Maybe it's paying off. Maybe the market is saying, "Let them download and listen."