Widespread digitization of social, economic, and cultural activity has brought intellectual property rights (IPR) and digital piracy to the forefront of 21st century public policy agendas. To date, research into the development of this policy area has produced two dominant narratives corresponding with competing theoretical conceptions of the state. First, the Neo-Marxist perspective sees policy as reflecting the interests of capitalist elites, and argues IPR legislation is driven by, and enacted in favour of, corporate rights-holders. Second, the Global Hegemony perspective sees policy outcomes as increasingly reflecting the interests of regional and global powers at the expense of national autonomy; proponents argue the U.S. government pressures IPR policy-makers around the world to create favourable market conditions for American firms.
This paper challenges these perspectives by comparing recently-enacted anti-piracy provisions with competing actors’ preferences, focusing on corporate rights-holders, U.S. government officials, and Canadian lawmakers. Canada is chosen as a case study for its economic proximity to the United States and its extensive parliamentary debate regarding copyright reform. Data come from archival records of parliamentary proceedings and leaked internal communications between U.S. government officials.
Results indicate neither the Neo-Marxist nor the Global Hegemony hypothesis fully explains the development of anti-piracy legislation in Canada. First, policy outcomes fail to reflect key demands by domestic rights-holders, suggesting the role of corporate interest groups in IPR policy-making may not be as strong as many suggest, at least in Canada. Second, outcomes reflecting U.S government preferences are limited to areas that overlap with international treaty ratification, while remaining U.S. preferences are rejected. The resulting picture more closely resembles a state-centered conception of policy-making, wherein Canadian officials strategically position legislation within a world system of IPR regimes so as to encourage domestic development of a newly emerging digital economy.
