Slashdot Mirror

"He added that cellphone jammers are illegal in Canada, but the department will soon release a policy on the devices."

Oh, the irony.

June 14, 2002 : Announcement of Industry Canada's Policy and Government Decision on Radiocommunication Jamming Devices

DECISION

Industry Canada is announcing that it will no longer authorize the use of jamming devices. This is consistent with the Departmental mandate to manage the radio frequency spectrum. With respect to the use of jamming devices in connection with federal security and law enforcement functions for national security purposes, an alternative authorization process is currently under review.

During the latest round of talks on changing Canadian copyright, the copyright board requested input from the general populace, and published the results on their website.

Because they had so many submisions, they also published a document entitled An Overview of Submissions on the Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues.. an interesting excerpt from this document is this:

"There were also submissions that characterized all activities on the Internet that involve unauthorized copying or communications as "piracy" rather than "infringement." It is unclear how this characterization was intended to relate to the traditional understanding of copyright remedies and sanctions."

So it looks like SOMEONE in power (somewhere) knows the difference.

Here's a government page about telemarketing law in Canada:
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/ct01067e.html

There doesn't seem to be the $500 kickback kinda deal, but they can get fined up to $20,000 for violating the law. Bill C-6 deals with telemarketing too (do not call lists and such, I think). Unfortunately Junkbusters only gives the USA situation the full treatment.

In Canada it is also (...for now... but stay tuned to properly oppose any pending legislation(!)) perfectly legal for a person to make copies of their own media. It is also absolutely LEGAL to copy ANOTHER PERSONS AUDIO CD.

What does this mean? (first see this faq) You can take your friend's CD and burn yourself a copy - and its legal. This is because Canadians pay a levy on CDRs which 'compensate' producers (et al). I dont agree that this is the best tactic, but it is a powerful one. If people were informed of this fact, and groups actively promoted this, you could eliminate the present distribution scheme in Canada (retailers/distributors/labels). The Library would be all that Canadians needed to have copies of all the music they wanted.

Now, why is this going OT? I would like to know, does anyone have links or Info to make a Linux based, CDR 'copy machine'? I would like to organize a 'Copy Your Friends CDs Party" at a library or some such (near the Uni in town would be good), but would like to be able to copy many-many volumes of CDs.

I also have thought about make such a device available on loan to local Libraries in order to 'promote' and 'encourage' the practice.

Can anyone provide a info to do such a thing? What would be really nice is if the device could be operated without a monitor - just insert discs and close the trays...

I'd be interested to know what the tech to management/pr ratio looks like for this company.

Curious about how fly by night they are? I know I am. I couldn't find them on USPTO or Strategis.

The actual name of the company is "Prescient International, Inc." - which is probably owned by an LLC. Here's an interesting google search based on that.

Interesting stuff. Is this the same company running out of a PO box in NC? Do they ever decide what their company actually does? Oh, and the last item in that search - a press release submitted December 19, 2001 describing the other product.

They must have an enormous number of people on their team. Three month turn around between reinventing RDMS and solving the world's encryption needs. Amazing!

--ipsuid

I think probably it would be more useful to worry about the terrible *Canadian* legislation that is working its way through the system, including:

• Canadian Copyright Reform Process
• the proposed new and increased levies from the CPCC
• DRM in Canada

Btw, if you ask nicely, they'll give you a tour of the innards. It's warm down there :)

Maybe you should have gone to a better law school. See guide to copyrights. Quoting from page 11: [example of non-infringement use] "borrowing a musical tape from a friend to copy onto a blank tape for private use".

"Objections must briefly state the reasons therefor, and must in-dicate the name, address, telephone number, facsimile number and electronic mail address of the objector. The objection must also contain the following declarations:
I intend to participate actively to the process leading to the certification of the private copying tariff. Consequently, this constitutes my formal objection to the proposed statement filed by CPCC.

I have read the information set out in the Board's notice published in the Canada Gazette on March 9, 2002 with CPCCs proposed statement. I understand the duties that I undertake as
an objector and intend to abide by them.

2. Legal Protection of Technological Measures

b) Perspective

...

The departments are of the view that providing a sanction against an act of circumvention, where the act is motivated by an infringing purpose, may [already] be addressed under copyright principles. A broader prohibition, including a prohibition against the manufacture and distribution of circumvention devices, may, in its effect protect rights that are beyond the scope of copyright protection (e.g. contractual rights). Such broader prohibitions may need to be considered under different policy principles and under a different legal regime.

I've received my formal invitation; if you want to attend, you should register first.

Specifics (locations, times, registration info) is available at the following web site:
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/rp00838e.html

On the plus side, looks like enough people from the praries complained, because they've posted a bulletin to the effect that there will be additional meetings in either Alberta, Sask., or Manitoba..

...or at least the equivalent of it. See the copyright reform process at Heretige Canada website for more details, although the deadline for comments has already expired. (700 were posted!)

I submitted comments to the Canadian copyright reform process (see here), and proposed something similar, except based on a percentage of the royalties derived from a copyrighted work - for the first year, there would be a copyright fee of 1%, next year 2%, and so on. After 100 years, the fee would be 100%, and remain there in perpetuity.

Alternatively, a copyright holder could opt for a straight 50 year term with no fees.

This would allow a copyright holder to decide how important a copyrighted work is. If it is no longer profitable, then there is no incentive to prevent other use, and the holder would likely let the copyright lapse (possibly earlier - administrative overhead might be an incentive).

Of course, the owner has the right to charge royalties of zero, and maintain the copyright for promotional purposes, say, or to prevent what they consider immoral uses (e.g. Snow White porn cartoons). And at some point, when holding the copyright is no longer profitable, someone might offer to pay for the releasing of rights (if they could use the work profitably, but maintaining the copyright is not worth the effort, and the original holder was not using it for anything).

This would provide a lot of choices that would cover a lot of situations.

Granted this is a couple orders of magnitude smaller in scale, but the Canadian government published all the more than 700 "Canadian DMCA" comments it got, even the one from The Edifying Fellowship of Ook.

Granted this is a couple orders of magnitude smaller in scale, but the Canadian government published all the more than 700 "Canadian DMCA" comments it got, even the one from The Edifying Fellowship of Ook.

In Canada it is legal to rebroadcast television that has already been broadcasted*. This is how the cable/satellite broadcasters are able to broadcast the Canadian networks. So why can't this apply to the net as well?

Good question, but you're not the first one to ask it. See http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/rp00008e.html, "Consultation Paper on the Application of the Copyright Act's Compulsory Retransmission License to the Internet"

The main page includes more information, as well as links to comments that were received from the general public on this paper and other proposed (bad; DMCA-style) changes to the Canadian copyright legislation.

In Canada it is legal to rebroadcast television that has already been broadcasted*. This is how the cable/satellite broadcasters are able to broadcast the Canadian networks. So why can't this apply to the net as well?

Good question, but you're not the first one to ask it. See http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/rp00008e.html, "Consultation Paper on the Application of the Copyright Act's Compulsory Retransmission License to the Internet"

The main page includes more information, as well as links to comments that were received from the general public on this paper and other proposed (bad; DMCA-style) changes to the Canadian copyright legislation.

The site in question, a Canadian smokers' rights group, was forced to remove their image of the flag after Mr. Ovens contacted them.

The Ministry of Health is at all out war with the Tobacco industry up here. You see it in posters, on TV, over the radio and on the Health Canada website. The site in question is run by their opponents.

My guess is FARCES[1], oops er, FORCES overstepped the boundaries of parody and deservedly got bitchslapped for it, not unlike another group that tried to emulate a Goverment site.

[1] I'm not a fan of Big Tobacco.

I totally disagree that the Canadian government should have exclusive rights to the Maple Leaf Flag; if they do own the trademark they certainly only enfroce it rarely (and then only for commercial use). Marks the government actively protects involve the flag, but also involve other things such as a stylised "Government of Canada" script or departmental names in that script. In any event, it would be in their best interests to make the flag freely available since it is one of the few unifying sybols of such a diverse and regionalised country, and the more it is used the more Canadians will feel part of Canada and not swallowed up by the USA. Considering the goverment had a fairly successful program promoting and giving away the Maple Leaf flag freely (real flags and graphics), I'd say they agree.

That being said, it appears that the site in question is still using a Maple Leaf Flag with the "Health Canada" department name beside it, in a script and style very similar to that actually used by Health Canada. The federal government is within their rights to go after a pro-smoking group that is displaying the Health Canada department logo in any manner.

I stand corrected. this s Page shows the registered flag.

It may not be registered, but that is not required for copyright (Besides, you showed a trademark). Trademarks don't require registration either, it just makes them stronger.

And since OpenBSD is based here in Canada, the above (NAL) summarized US rules don't necessarily apply, other than through treaties on Intellectual Property. It is not a registered trademark in Canada either, as you can check here.

I guess it isn't that strange that its not regestered at the USPTO then, I forgot all about the whole ``Blame Canada'' thing. It is kind of strange that it isn't registered in Canada though. It can't cost that much to register something.

Government of Canda

Alrighty that url above shows two 'flag symbols' that I can see them having problems with if in fact they were the 'flag symbol' described in the writeup.

I can't seem to find a pic of what they actually had there that was taken away.

On the top left we have the 'stylized flag -Government of Canada' logo and on the right, the 'Canada' with a flag flying from the 'd'

This is the icon referenced as a trademark with the 'Canadian Intellectual Property Office' at this URL:
Industry Canada?

It's worth noting that this last site, at the top, displays the 'stylized flag - Industry Canada' icon and the Government wide 'Canada' icon with the flag flying from the 'd' and over the 'a'

These marks are widely used and recognized - this has nothing to do with displaying the flag.

Thanks for your time :-)

It may not be registered, but that is not required for copyright (Besides, you showed a trademark). Trademarks don't require registration either, it just makes them stronger.

And since OpenBSD is based here in Canada, the above (NAL) summarized US rules don't necessarily apply, other than through treaties on Intellectual Property. It is not a registered trademark in Canada either, as you can check here.

Here is the trademark database record the article is refering to. The trademark consists of the flag plus some text beside it, not just the flag.

Hyperchip: 1 Canadian patent (actually it says there it was filed in the US ;-)

That patent has 30 claims. Is that what they mean when they say they have 40 patents? Are they also counting "patent pending" applications? Or what? Can someone email the company so they can defend their claims. Please do copy us on it. It would be interesting to know how reliable those patent databases really are.

Stephan

Hyperchip: 1 Canadian patent (actually it says there it was filed in the US ;-)

That patent has 30 claims. Is that what they mean when they say they have 40 patents? Are they also counting "patent pending" applications? Or what? Can someone email the company so they can defend their claims. Please do copy us on it. It would be interesting to know how reliable those patent databases really are.

Stephan

It doesn't sound like you have been following the Canadian Copyright Reform Process, which has some proposals with similiarities to aspects of the DMCA.

In Canada, the "blank media" levy is bigger and applied to more media, including data CD-R discs, so it's even more upsetting. Activists there have already noted that it's incompatible with the arguments for anti-fair-dealing measures. The record companies have to give up one or the other (at least!). The earliest mention of this issue that I've seen is in the September 14, 2001 submission of Eric R. Smith, PhD to the Canadian government's copyright reform comment process, and flagged in a reply comment of Matthew Skala.

But of course, it wasn't news for Slashdot until a U.S. Congressman thought to mention it.

If you're looking for actual 3D models to view (in VRML) made using this (or similar) technology visit: The AMUSE Project. It contains 61 3D digital representations of various aboriginal artifacts. Very cool stuff.

The actual scanning resolution is much higher than what you see on the web, of course. The native resolution is incredible.

(Now assuming a certain friend of mine sees this, you'll get a better explanation since he actually worked for one of those companies...)

Wouldn't that be nice. Unfortunately it's not the case.

Canadian law will be updated to reflect current American law, both the CTEA and the DMCA. For the latter, it's a matter of international commitments. Don't blame the Americans, but blame WIPO and TRIPS (well, okay, blame the Americans too).

Care to read about Canada's coming Intellectual Property reform? It's not for the faint of heart.

And here's some more reading material in case you're not sufficiently riled at our government already.

Wouldn't that be nice. Unfortunately it's not the case.

Canadian law will be updated to reflect current American law, both the CTEA and the DMCA. For the latter, it's a matter of international commitments. Don't blame the Americans, but blame WIPO and TRIPS (well, okay, blame the Americans too).

Care to read about Canada's coming Intellectual Property reform? It's not for the faint of heart.

And here's some more reading material in case you're not sufficiently riled at our government already.

In Canada, the law that is supposed to protect Canadian consumers and businesses is the Competition Act. The Government agency in charge of upholding this law is the Competition Bureau.

It is funny how the Microsoft has been convicted in the US and EU of illegal monopolistic business practices yet the Canadian Competition Bureau has done nothing. You can email them to ask why here.

If you are Canadian and want to ask the same question of your member of parliment, their email addresses are here.

In Canada, the law that is supposed to protect Canadian consumers and businesses is the Competition Act. The Government agency in charge of upholding this law is the Competition Bureau.

It is funny how the Microsoft has been convicted in the US and EU of illegal monopolistic business practices yet the Canadian Competition Bureau has done nothing. You can email them to ask why here.

If you are Canadian and want to ask the same question of your member of parliment, their email addresses are here.

The Canadian government is considering DMCA-type legislation; it's not clear yet whether they're going to implement it, but it is clear that the behind-the-scenes folks have a good understanding of why it would be a bad idea. The question, really, is whether the lawmakers will listen to their own experts. I have high hopes.

I maintain a links page relating to the "DMCA in Canada" issue. On that page are links to my own submission, at ~24000 words the longest one they received in their public comment process; also the government copyright-reform Web site, the Edifying Fellowship of Ook (arguably the most creative submission), etc. I'd urge anyone interested in Canadian copyright law to check these documents out.

I doubt it's any of those three, although C-Net is probably up there.

This is the biggest site I know of. However, it's also one of the most poorly organized, with probably terabytes of lost documents.

Being a Professional Engineer in Canada means you have taken the necessary ethics courses and are accountable for your own work. You can become a PEng in Canada by meeting the qualifications laid out (on a per-province basis) in the second link I provided, and graduating from a university engineering program is usually NOT among the requirements.

If your Canadian, there is info about the effort to bring DMCA-style fascism to Canada, read here:http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/167203.html

and .gc.ca info here

You still have time to prevent this from happening in Canada. We have similar connectivity to the USA and are very close in proximity. Our laws prohibit personal weapons but are much more lax in digital expression at this time.

Check out this article on ITBusiness.ca or the government's submissions page on the issue. We're engaging in "Copyright Reform" -- submit your opinions.

Yeah, repost! :) I only managed to catch it in "older stuff"

&lt AOL />

For anyone who's interested, the Canadian government is currently considering changes to our copyright law (DMCA-style). However they at least had the decency to ask for public comments. The deadline for sending in comments was Oct 22, but it's still worth reading some of the material here and here

Yeah, repost! :) I only managed to catch it in "older stuff"

&lt AOL />

For anyone who's interested, the Canadian government is currently considering changes to our copyright law (DMCA-style). However they at least had the decency to ask for public comments. The deadline for sending in comments was Oct 22, but it's still worth reading some of the material here and here

Transgaming is cool. Read the submission they wrote to the Canadian government's copyright comment process.

If you're in Canada, please take a look at http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/rp01100e.html.

The Canadian governemnt has asked for public comments on proposed (DMCA-style) changes to our copyright law. Although the deadline for initial submissions was September 15, you have until October 22 to make comments on those submissions.

Don't let the Canadian governemnt rubber-stamp the content industry's wishlist! Get your comments in while you can.

That link to the list of people who replied has an entry from Bob Young (CEO of Redhat, Canadian)

A lack of the DMCA... yet.


I hate the postercomment compression filter.

The Potato Then & Now: History
History and Origin of the Potato
Indepthinfo's "Potato! - History"

There is evidence that the potato was cultivated (i.e., selectively grown as opposed to collected from the wild) more than 4500 years ago. You will have a hard time finding any food in its original wild version, from potatoes to tomatoes to carrots to wheat to cows.

There's good and bad points to selective cultivation/breeding. The smell was "hybridded" out of roses, but they get long, straight stems, few thorns, single flowers on a stem, large buds that stay closed for a long time... just about everything that people want in cut flowers. We have nice, big heads of broccoli with lots of florets and few leaves.

I am not thrilled with GM foods, but not so much based on the "unnatural" aspect as from the lack of long-term safety studies and testing.

If you get your kicks walking through 2,000 acres looking for edible plants in their wild and natural/original state, more power to you. I have trouble looking for a few edible mushrooms on 2 acres, and there are few mushrooms that are as tasty (or as expensive) as the Steinpilz (boletus). I'll stick to supermarkets.

woof.

You wouldn't believe how serious a lot of people take potatoes. I found out once I started the Official French Fries Pages.

Even if you missed the September 15th posting deadline you can have some input into the process. The Canadian government will be posting the received opinions and comments to a web page for public viewing, and are encouraging the public to comment on the submissions no later than October 5th. The web site doesn't yet contain the comments-- keep your eyes peeled. Finally, a place where "me too" posts are not only appropriate but encouraged!

I've already written the IPPD and my local representatives to oppose it. You should too.
The IPPD proposal (with e-mail address to send comments to) is here. The deadline for comments is the 15th, so hurry up.

If you would take this sitting down, you might as well move south.

This isn't a draft law, yet; it only puts up for discussion some ideas that could eventually be made into laws. I have to agree with the EFF that they are disturbing, and will be sending a letter stating my opposition. I'd say now is the best time to object, before they gather any inertia.

You may be interested to know a version of the DMCA is coming to Canada, whether or not you think entertainment and consumerism applies up north as well.

Then some well-paid foreign hacker can crack the server, launch the missile at Canada and all heck breaks loose.

I'm not too worried about that. Most of Canada is nearly uninhabited, so you'd probably only kill some deer and the rednecks who were hunting them. Given the average American's knowledge of Canadian geography, I'm not too worried about you guys finding our major population centres, even though they're pretty much all within a 100 kilometres of the US border (and yes, that's how we spell "centres" here). :-)

Seriously, though, I must urge my fellow Canadians to visit this government site and send them your comments on the proposed DMCA-like revisions to Canadian copyright law.