Pang in Relation to the Fight for Fair Copyright in Canada

The United States is both the leader of world cinema and the owner of global copyright, not only the copyright of products but also the discourse of copyright itself. As copyright discourse becomes an American diplomatic tool, the United States as a nation and Hollywood as a culture industry composed mainly of transnational corporations are conflated into one single monolithic power that defines what copyright consists of (Pang, 135). While reading the Pang article, “Copying Kill Bill,” I was struck by the array of inconsistencies regarding what indeed constitutes copyright infringement. Further, I was able to relate the idea of a US-centric copyright policy to occurrences in the Canadian Government and a new proposed copyright amendment.

Unlike the situation in Hollywood, the increasing global popularity of Hong Kong cinema has not led Hong Kong’s major studios, such as Shaw, to seek more copyright of their works.
According to Shaw the only legal copyright case they have ever launched took place in 1971, when its major rival Golden Harvest produced the film The Blind Swordsman Meets his Equal. Apparently this film infringed on Shaw’s earlier box office hit One-Armed Swordsman (Pang, 136). The irony in this situation, however, lies in the fact that the one-armed swordsman is so frequently seen in the Tarantino film Kill Bill that it almost becomes a parody. Arguably, Tarantino is consciously using and stealing the image and the symbolization of the one-armed swordsman for his own film, which to Shaw should be as “guilty” as Golden Harvest’s borrowing was thirty years ago (Pang, 136). But, rather, the reference to Shaw films in Kill Bill, a major Hollywood production is read as an honor instead of an infringement. This emphasizes the often underlying assumption that Hollywood productions are superior in terms of creativity and in the legal sense. It is thus only Hong Kong plagiarizing Hollywood and never vice versa, a notion that follows with the idea of U.S.-centric copyright discourse, wherein the United States is always portrayed as the victim (Pang, 136). Hollywood is essentially seen as a trustworthy enterprise, and one that would not steal ideas, however if they ever did it would be seen more as an honour than a breech of copyright.

In running with the idea of US-centric copyright discourse one may wish to turn their attentions to the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) and how this United States Copyright law is affecting Canadians. In December 2007, it became apparent that the Canadian government was about to introduce new copyright legislation that would have been what has been labelled a “complete sell-out to U.S. government and lobbyist demands”(Geist, 2008) The new Canadian legislation was to have mirrored the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act with strong anti-circumvention legislation that goes far beyond what is needed to comply with the World Intellectual Property Organization's Internet treaties. Moreover, it was not going to address the issues that concern millions of Canadians. For example, the Conservatives' promise to eliminate the private copying levy was to be abandoned. There was essentially no flexible fair dealing, no time shifting exception, no device shifting exception, and no expanded backup provision, nothing that focuses on the concerns of ordinary Canadians (Geist, 2008).

The following clip emphasizes in greater detail than I could ever tell the imperative nature of the DMCA issue in Canada. As Canadians we are often forced to defend ourselves in the face of the ever looming possibility of becoming culturally indistinguishable from our neighbours to the South. We so easily seem to fall victim to propositions and Bills being initiated not for our Canadian national purposes, but rather the Capitalistic ambitions of the United States. Just like the SPP puts power into the hand of corporate interests rather than Canadian, US, or Mexican citizens the implementation of a DMCA in Canada would put the power into the hands of those corporations producing music or software for example instead of in the hands of Canadian law. The video puts this into further perspective as well as suggesting possible outlets for activism within this field. Enjoy!!!

Sources:
Geist, Michael. “The Fight for Fair Copyright in Canada.” Michael Geist Blog March 31, 2008. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/
Pang, Laikwan (2005). ‘Copying Kill Bill’. Social Text, 23 (2): 133-153.