Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Recording Industry Goes After P2P Users
Txiasaeia writes "Taking its cue from its American counterpart, the CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association) has begun the hunt for music file swappers. Unlike the RIAA, the CRIA are trying to find 29 (!) swappers only who use either Shaw, Telus, Rogers Cable, Bell Sympatico or Quebec's Videotron. Some companies like Shaw are openly opposing the request, whereas others, like Videotron, are pretty much planning on rolling over once the paperwork is done. Videotron customers beware: they say that they're 'actually delighted that the CRIA is doing what it's doing.' Arguments in the case begin on Monday in Toronto."
Article sez:
For example, it has been legal in Canada since 1998 to make a single copy of a recording for personal use, such as copying a CD onto your hard drive or MP3 player. But the practice is illegal in the U.S.
Uh. Did I miss something? Did MP3 ripping from CD get banned in the USA while we weren't looking?
Hi. I'm Troy McClure. You might remember me from such popular Canadian albums as "Nothing But Rush: A History of Canadian Popular Music".
Oh wait a minute, that is pretty bad.
Oh happy, happy days
when you see an industry suing their customers, i can't wait till this spreads to other industries
if this is the direction for capitalism then i give society another 20years max before very bad things start to happen
Article sez:
Videotron is in a unique position because its parent company, Quebecor, also sells music, Videotron says it is concerned about copyright protection and considers file sharing to be "theft."
Well, there we have it. ISP attitudes on copyright and privacy issues are completely tied to how much content the ISP's parent company owns. Road Runner customers beware, and Comcast customers better hope the Disney deal doesn't go through.
This is the country that already has some pretty high media levies based on the assumption that illegal copies are being made. It's currently $0.21 (data CD) and $0.77 (audio CD), but there are proposed increases, including an $840 levy on each 40GB iPod! ($0.021/MB)
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
I don't understand why nerds get so up in arms when people defend their intellectual property.
If people are breaking the law and sharing music then they deserve what happens. Yeah yeah yeah, they should make sure the person they're suing is the right one and they should be reasonable about the penalties. But they certainly don't have to just stand by and bend themselves over a barrel.
I'm not surprised at all that Videotron would support that. They are owned by Quebec's biggest (only big) media conglomerate, Quebecor.. Which is also the world's largest printer (Quebecor World), but that's pretty separate from Quebecor Media...
So Quebecor media also owns, appart from Videotron (cable), the biggest TV network (TVA), the most read newspapers (Le journal de Montreal and Le journal de Quebec), quite a few magasines and more importantly in this case, Musicor.. a record label.. They are not well known outside Quebec though, because all of their media are in French... but they are THE dominant player in Quebec...
this reminds me of an article posted on slashdot not a while ago, regarding Free trade between US and Australia, involving Australia with the same copyright laws the US has. Supposedly each country that faces this (Chile is on the verge of Free trade with the US) will begin the "hunt". I wonder if legal rulings on countries that "hunt" some p2p company will serve as a precedent in other trials to other countries.
"The quality of life is inversely proportional to the number of keys on your keyring."
Happy Trails!
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
>For example, it has been legal in Canada since 1998 to make a single copy of a recording for personal use, such as copying a CD onto your hard drive or MP3 player.
>But under the Copyright Act, it remains illegal to give or sell a CD copy to a friend, since it's not for personal use. In the same vein, distributing copies to friends online is prohibited.
I have a solid legal footing why I am a Kazza-leach.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
How is this unlike the RIAA? They started off small, hitting users of the major US ISPs like Verizon, Comcast, etc. I don't know all of the Canadian ISPs, but those sound like all of the big ones to me.
slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
Why does Canada have to imitate the U.S. in all things? It would be nice to have our government to take a stand against the oppressive RIAA and stop this litigation before it gets going too far. The Canadian people do not want Big Brother to be accusing and convicting the 12 year old swappers like the U.S.
Stay tuned for new sig...
Actually, Bell Canada, while not Quebec only is still very present here. I think I'll consider to switch...
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
I guess in this case you CAN really blame canada :)
I'm glad this crap isn't taking place in the Netherlands. For now downloading is legal here, uploading isn't.
Some dutch artists are trying to influence the government into changing the law here to go after the downloaders as well.
If cds were cheap here, I would say "all power to them" but right now they cost about $30,- each.
What is the approx. price of cd's in the US? a somewhat empty mind wants to know.
This is the sig that says NI (again)
i'd a bit more scared buit 29 people and all of them are sharing the same crap i hear on canadian radio.. wheee, if they get them, or me for that matter (not that i use a p2p program *nudge wink*).
will it mean less nickleback and crap such as that being distributed to the rest of the world?
Not entirely on-topic, but I'd like this to be heard...
I've never had more trouble with any internet/TV company in my life. Horrible customer service, no explanations for outages, outrageous rates. I had to hire a lawyer to get out of a $900 cable TV bill. Not only did I never sign up for cable TV, I don't even own a TV!
But with the way the market works here in Canada (I don't know about the states or elsewhere) there is only one cable provider in each of the major urban centers. So, so much for healthy competition. I'm not at all surprised that Videotron will simply hand over IPs/names to the CRIA, it saves them paperwork and hassles, and fits in with their total disregard for customer service and respect that they've made themselves known for in Montreal.
Why doesn't it surprise me that videotron is willing to roll over? Videotron is a Quebec based company.
Typical French, "We surrender!"/
Maybe its because they are owned by a huge media conglomerate that's also has music label?
Next up: Sun rises, sun sets.
Anyone else getting really tired of reading about *IAA? We're all well aware of the issues involved, I don't really see the need for this to be front page material nearly every day.
Let's have some priorities, please. Like our daily SCO story...siiigh. It's times like these that I wish we had voting rights like Kuro5hin, because every morning I load slashdot, I have trouble telling whether it's actually new news, or the same 2-3 topics over and over.
Please help metamoderate.
"Working on behalf of major record labels, the CRIA is reportedly hunting for 29 Canadian customers from at least five different ISPs"
Damn! they're on to me and my 28 cohorts!
Peer to peer sucks bandwidth, a direct cost to any service provider. The only reason any ISP is going to stick up for users is for the PR, Fact-o'-life.
Spyder
Videotron is in a unique position because its parent company, Quebecor, also sells music, Videotron says it is concerned about copyright protection and considers file sharing to be "theft."
DrkBr
Whoops. They backed off the MP3 levy down to $25/40GB, but I didn't see that in the main chart. I'm not Canadian, so I haven't followed this too closely.
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
Seems like they're trying to 'protect' Canadian artists. I don't know much about Canadian record labels, but there are some big music names coming from Canada, like Bryan Adams, Shania Twain, Alanis Morisette, Nelly Furtado, Celine Dion...
:-)
It's not all bad though, they also have some good bands, like Godspeed You Black Emperor!
Is that they stay within their boundry of control. I'm not really concerned with prosecution over the mp3s with Canadian-bound ownership which I don't have.
" correction : we want to keep on making money...
Videotron is in a unique position because its parent company, Quebecor, also sells music, Videotron says it is concerned about copyright protection and considers file sharing to be "theft." "
It may consider file sharing theft, robbery, murder, rape, or operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated if it likes - it doesn't make it so. The day that it does, the CIA's world factbook needs to change the type of government in Canada to "Corporatist".
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Fellow Quebecor (Videotron's parent company) sibling Archambault has recently opened a digital music download service predictably-named Archambaultzik.com.
Actually quite the opposite. Here in Canada, Quebec is famous for refusing to go along with anything that the Federal government or other provincial governments want to do. Unless it somehow results in them getting more money or more rights. Subject of course to them being able to use the funds however they wish.
Does this mean the CRIA is going to rebate or cancel the levies I pay on every CD-R I buy so that I can presumably burn CRIA content?
Thought you guys apologized aboot Bryan Adams?
This guy is way out there
In Canada, the answer is "no".
Reason why there is hope for the future generation #364:
"I wish my grass was emo so it could cut itself."
Something tells me we'll be hearing from Canadian music-swappers about how "the record companies only put one or two good songs on a CD...". If they, and all their U.S. counterparts, vote with their money (i.e. don't buy CD's, or iTunes songs, etc) and stop downloading music, the *IAA will have nothing to explain away lost profits, and the record companies will be forced to produce decent music to survive.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
In the Toronto Star CRIA, what a perfect acronym: CRY EH!
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Videotron customers beware: they say that they're 'actually delighted that the CRIA is doing what it's doing.
they're delighted because that would reduce users bandwidth usage. in videotron's POV, they only care about the company saving money. i dont think they really care about the "non-ethical" aspects of music sharing. they're one of the first ISPs in quebec (quebequeers) that started the monthly download quota limit. and of course by saying they're delighted, it just makes themselves look "ethical".
i used to use bell canada, and all of a sudden in a month they charged me $100 because of going over the bandwidth download limit. i didnt get any sort of notification. about 12 months later, many people started to complain and they took off the cap. it's all about ISPs making and saving money.
my blog
Slashdot Response: "Why do the police have to do the **AA's dirtywork! This is blah blah blah corporate shills blah blah blah."
Scenario 1B: Copyright holder privately goes after copyright infringers.
Slashdot response: "Can you believe the nerve of these people. This is what the police are for! blah blah blah nazi stormtroopers blah blah blah."
Scenario 2A: New, obviously-designed-primarily-for-warez-pr0n-and-m
Slashdot Response: "Technology is blameless! Go after the infringers, but leave technology alone!"
Scenario 2B: Infringers gone after.
Slashdot Response: "Can you believe the nerve of those people shaking down college students!"
Scenario 3A: Copyright is used to protect somebody else's intellectual property
Slashdot Response: Copyright has outlived its usefulness! Viva la revolucion!
Scenario 3B: the GPL is violated.
Slashdot Response: Hang em high!
Hasn't the CRIA hurt us enough with CanCon?
In Canada downloading music from the net is legal. Owning music on your hard drive for which you do not have the original CD is also legal.
;-)
What is illegal is uploading (sharing) songs which you do not have distribution permission from the copyright holder to the general public. For example, if i open a private FTP site and i prove that only my friends have access to it, then it falls neatly under 'fair use' clause. More concretly if i go to my friends house and rip all my music on his computer, this falls under 'fair use' also.
The Canadian copyright act is also a reason why the CRIA gets a levy on blank medias and hard drives and can't sue file swappers as efficiently as the RIAA. Hence the 29(!). lol.
Don't take this as a legal advice though i could be wrong, or it could cost you a lot to defend this position.
In India, Bollywood makes P2P servers for us.
In America, Hollywood attacks P2P servers for you.
I have doubts.
Don't start saying "We love you Quebec!" because we're different. Are you Don Cherry's brother?
There are some evils for which no apology is adequate :-)
Damn! This means I can't download the movie Strange Brew along with Bryan Adams songs anymore!
CMDRTACO CHECK YOUR EMAIL!
Its a 'area monopoly' here too..
Your choices are the local cable company, or you go dish.. ( or rabbit ears )
At least with the phone company you can choose to use the local carrier, or have a 3rd party use the local carriers line for a reduced rate ( due to that stupid ATT breakup ) and get your phone service from them.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Thanks God, today you can download tons of various (good and bad) music files using just Google. I don't even know, why people use P2P? Using a simple script you can have easily few gigabytes of music just in few days.
But is it safe?
Less is more !
Presumably, I would then have no source of shared CRIA content in which to burn to CD-Rs other than my own, which I shouldn't have to pay a levy for as it falls under fair use.
Are you Don Cherry's sister? From la belle province.
Despite all the arguements I think this whole thing is pretty increadible. The Canadian government has been taxing media and using the funds gathered to pay artists. Now they are allowing the RIAA to pursue a legal recourse (albeit through nominally Canadian channels). It appears Paul Martin is Bushs .
Canada has a pretty decent history of not prosecuting laws that are still being debated (While weed legalization was being discussed police stopped small scale arrests,[Still busted some big grows]) I don't think there are any (Canadian, American's are stupid) politicians who don't have doubts about enforcing the ridiculous American IP laws.
My only conclusion is that this issue has been sacrificed as part of a deal. I'm enough of a realist to know that deals of this nature need to be struck. I don't think that whoever allowed this to happen realizes the consequences.
First we are bowing to the American's in such a way as to forever compromise Canada's reputation as an honest unbiased power (Lester B. Pearson, etc.), second we are an example to other countries. If we fold IP law will remain restrictive and useless until society once again returns to a sane level of socialism or another technological breakthrough on the order of magnitude of the internet takes place causing people to reconsider intellectual property. (Trying to think of something that fits this description leads me to a short list.) Either way you are condemning people in the third world to ignorance and poverty for another hundred years, the death toll is on your head. Depending on how seriously you think knowledge = power = life, Paul Martin might be worse than Hitler.
Simple form: Paul, if you are willing to negotiate our intellectual freedom we may decide to negotiate for it back, is one life too much to pay?
Someone did something illegal. The victim went after them. *Yawn*
The masses are the crack whores of religion.
But under the Copyright Act, it remains illegal to give or sell a CD copy to a friend, since it's not for personal use. In the same vein, distributing copies to friends online is prohibited.
and a related article:
Canada deems P2P downloading legal
I'm in Canada and I've sampled a number of songs from the binary newsgroups: alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.* as the law allows me to (for now)
That's not a P2P service, obviously, but from the ISPs own newservers. So wouldnt the ISP make a better target? After all, arent they distributing content to 900,000+ subscribers (according to the article)?? Think of the damages one could claim against an ISP if they were found guilty of copyright infringement on that scale.
Why pick out 29 individuals to pursue legal recourse? Because it's about fear and publicity. These 29 people are not likely to have the inclination, resources, or will to fight an expensive legal battle. Like the RIAA cases, they will settle for a couple thousand $ and a press conference where they tearfully apologize for thier wrongdoings. Fellow canadians who do not follow the legal aspect of such issues closely will simply hear 'file sharers get sued' and freak out and think the downloading music is wrong: mission accomplished. Will the press make the point that personal copying in Canada is LEGAL when reporting these stories? Possibly, but I'm not betting on it.
The CD itself probably costs less than $0.21 to manufacture. What it boils down to is this: the music industry (and all of its lined pockets) want, pure and simple, a welfare program that's tailored specifically to them. And they have it. Hope all these CEOs feel good about being on the public dole.
If this happens in the US, it will be a blatant violation of due process, as such a tax implicitly accuses, tries, convicts, and sentences someone without ANY indication that they've even so much as THOUGHT about copying something.
For example, if i open a private FTP site and i prove that only my friends have access to it, then it falls neatly under 'fair use' clause.
No. This would be an example of distribution, the same as if you made a copy of a CD and gave it to a friend. Both cases are not allowed.
If you never signed up for cable, you likely aren't liable.
If/when it goes to collections they have to prove you owe the money.
You should check your credit report, and make sure there aren't any claims from them. (equifax.ca, and it's FREE!!!)
isn't 29 the number of people in Canada who can actually get broadband?
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
Videotron already charges outrageous overage fees on file swappers. Now they say they don't want the business..
"In terms of protecting the identity of our subscribers, we're doing everything we can, but if there's a court order we certainly won't fight it," [Videotron's parent company, Quebecor Inc.] executive vice-president Luc Lavoie told The Globe and Mail. "We're actually delighted that the CRIA is doing what it's doing."
Why don't you call Luc Lavoie yourself and tell him how delighted you are to be one of his customers?
Luc Lavoie
executive vice-president - Corporate Affairs
Quebecor inc.
Office : (514) 380- 1974
Mobile : (514) 236- 8742
lavoie.luc@quebecor.com
Don't forget bands like Nickelback, The Barenaked Ladies & Simple Plan
4B4556494E
Your aka is "democracy" and your from "la belle province" huh? If that isn't irony I don't know what is!!
Mod +5 Drunk
For example, if i open a private FTP site and i prove that only my friends have access to it, then it falls neatly under 'fair use' clause
/not a lawyer either
No it doesn't, this is unauthorized distribution of copyrighted materials and is not covered by fair use. your other examples seem to stand well though.
I'll have something intelligent to add one of these days...
(quebequeers)
Oh. I guess THAT was the insightful part?
You are more than the sum of what you consume. Desire is not an occupation.
Quebecor's cable division, known as Videotron and once held by a generous and employee-centered team of directors, the Chagnon Family, announce that they are moving their backbones to WindowsEmbedded-powered backbones, their DNS with IIS-based servers, [...you know where it's getting...]
...even later...
Videotron Broadband Internet Access files for bankruptcy. The apparent cause, denied by Quebecor Holdings but confirmed by the Chagnon family, is that their servers crash each day, resulting in a disconnection for thousands of broadband videotron clients.
This is my opinion. Everyone has a right to my opinion.
MP3's are frowned upon by certain "people". In fact, these "people" have setup a web site for consumers who are "confused" about file sharing. They even have a message board, which I strongly encourage you to post there about your opinion of the RIAA. This was orignally mentioned in orthogonal's journal.
Not a problem, unless Company X happens to be, say, a major motherboard maker. Now that they control the entire market, if you want a new Mobo, you're forced to buy from them, at whatever terms they feel like. And, if the example set by most governments these days is followed, little to nothing will be done.
And you can't just keep you're old board forever. Eventually, it will break, or you'll need to upgrade something, etc.
Thus, the people get screwed by The Man. Gotta love the world these days...
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Rogers Cable is my ISP. The other day I got snail-mail spam from them, promoting their Digital Video Recorder and a movie-on-demand service.
I suspect they might crackdown on bittorrent movie downloads pretty soon... considering they have no monthly download cap.
Hopefully they upgraded their cable infrastructure to support the additional load for the set-top movie boxes, otherwise I'll be one unhappy high-speed cable customer.
And for those who dont know, Rogers also offers TV cable, Cellphone services, and operates a video rental store chain.
can be found in this FAQ.
- Audio cassettes (of 40 minutes or more in length): 29 each
- CD-R and CD-RW: 21 each
- CD-R Audio, CD-RW Audio and MiniDisc: 77 each
- For non-removable memory permanently embedded in a digital audio recorder: $2 for each recorder that can record no more than 1 Gb of data, $15 for each recorder that can record more than 1 Gb and no more than 10 Gbs of data, and $25 for each recorder that can record more than 10 Gbs of data.
As well, the whole proposal (by the copyright industry) of levying flash memory and dvd-r was thrown completely out the window.
In Soviet America the banks rob you!
No surprise there.
They've been active in ensuring anybody gets in trouble no matter what.
The company that owns them (Quebecor) is particularly horrid as well, banning Religious & Ethnic Satellite Television (FTA) advertising from their newspapers.
Might want to stay the hell away from them...
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
2001 Census, population of Canada: 31,050,700
2000 CyberTrends report, percent of Canadians using the net: 54%
Number of Canucks the dark ones are looking for to sacrifice at the evil altar of Music Industry Ineptitude: 29
So, 0.54 x 31,050,700 = 16,767,378
29 / 16,767,378 x 100% = 0.000173% chance of them getting to me
I like those odds.
As Eastwood so elegantly asked "Do you feel lucky?"
" [Videotron] they say that they're 'actually delighted that the CRIA is doing what it's doing.' "
...
... buy music " and they are accompanied by some of the "commercials" artists of Quebecor.
Well that's no surprise. Videotron is owned by Quebecor which owns a big part of the music market in Quebec. They own the music, the artists, their careers, musicstores
They are totally opposed to music sharing. Since a couple of months, they are leading a big campaign against file swapping. They also owns television channels and newspapers, so we are constantly reminded that getting music for free is illegal and bad.
You can see a couple of the ads they have on their website, one of the most "important" Quebec website, here.
They translates to " swapping harms the music artisans
Quebecor is evil.
...the number of people applying for Canadian citizenship suddenly dropped once this report became wide-spread.
-jls
Techno-pagan
If the Canadian people don't want this, then they can stop it.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
What are you talking aboot?
This guy is way out there
that sucks. Don't associate us with Frenchs. We kicked ass in WWII and way before americans did so.
I'm sorry to say this already happened in the U.S., and even earlier than in Canada (the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992). At least we Canadians can legally make copies as partial compensation for this rip-off, you Americans just get to pay.
-- Pot is safer than Beer
2004-02-13 15:32:16 CRIA Seeks All 29 File Swappers in Canada (articles,music) (rejected)
It had a sense of irony and humour, y'know? Anyway, I really can't wait until they start handing out subpoenas. If I get busted (highly unlikely), I am *so* taking this to the courts! First of all, it's civil and not criminal so I won't go to jail, and second, we've got some fairly intelligent judges up here who would definitely be able to make a fair ruling on this case.
My defense: as soon as I heard that the CRIA was going to be following in the footsteps of their older American brother, I decided to never buy another CD and never download another MP3. This also includes refusing to buy music-related merchandise as well as concert tickets. I'm in my early 20's, so I've got many, many years of not purchasing music ahead of me.
Besides, if it's legal to download, then why shouldn't it be legal to upload? I mean, come on! The ONLY WAY you *can* download is if somebody sends you the file! Either prosecute both or neither!
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
I have to agree with you 100%. I recently visited Vancouver, where they had excellent used CD stores and A&B Sound had some really good prices. My wife and I bought 23 CDs because we averaged about $10 each (Canadian!).
I won't buy copy protected CDs and I won't pay more than $15, unless it is very special. Why can't the record companies give me what I want? I own more than 1000 CDs (and no MP3), I would have thought I was a good customer.
-- Pot is safer than Beer
maybe the ruling Liberal party in Canada is a bit busy at the moment with public corporation scandals and an internal witch-hunt?
That's not insightful, it's Flamebait
but legality/ illegality is often askew of right/ wrong
with p2p, legality has not caught up with present circumstances
entrenched big business is trying to protect a dying distribution medium by fighting the new medium with laws that are only right when the new medium didn't exist
get it? got it? good
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
Actually the Copyright Act provides an exemption for copying, except where it is done for purposes of distribution,/i>.
It may well be that leaving a p2p share open is not "distribution". IANAL, but IMHO distribution requires an active role on the part of the person distributing. Leaving a shared drive open, does not seem to meet the real world meaning of distribution.
There is also the question as to whether leaving a shared drive open is for the "purposes" of distribution. Both tests need to be met.
The CRIA may very well lose this case if they attack a subscriber with the resources to take this to court - or better yet, a lawyer!
As for the stupid comments from Quebecor/Videotron, I can only hope that Videotron loses all of their subscribers - I'm boycotting the Toronto Sun, and for those who want to join a boycott, here is a list of their subsidiaries, that includes newspapers such as the London Free Press, Ottawa Sun, Winnipeg Sun, Calgary Sun and the Edmonton Sun. Lets see how they feel about a drop in newspaper subscription revenues (and as a result, advertising revenues)!,/p>
Typical French, "We surrender!"
Typical anglo-saxon bigotry.
:wq
Anyone catch Conan last night?
Videotron was the brainchild of Claude Chagnon, a very successful businessman in Quebec, who had a lot of interest in medias. Videotron had interactive TV in the late eighties, and invested a lot of money into bringing out cable internet to cover the most customers possible.
All changed when he decided to merge with Rogers Cable. Quebecor saw this as an opportunity and used nationalistic rantings and political influence to get the "Caisse et Placement du Quebec" to invest with Quebecor and avoid having a Quebec company join up with one from out west. I couldn't believe people actually believed all that BS but it worked. Instead of winding up with a coast-to-coast network with tons of users, a media giant wound up getting the biggest cable and high-speed internet provider in Quebec.
I was a tech support monkey when that happenend, and I couldn't believe it. We quickly saw where it was gonna go. Pierre K. Peladeau (that's french for Darl McBride, he's the a-hole son of one of the richest man ever in quebec, who passed away in the nineties) started complaining that the management of Videotron was one of the worst one he ever saw. He proceeded to turn almost all of the cable installation/service call work to sub-contractor, to get rid of the highly payed and qualified techs. He also wanted to lower the salary of the tech support people (making barely 15 bucks an hour on average), and transferring some of the load to his 8 bucks an hour slave call centers. The techs went on strike for a year (I was gone at that point), but Quebecor had the infrastructure to make it work without them (with the help of scabs).
Of interest is that our IP telephony project was in highly advanced stages before the buy-out, with techs using it at home for beta testing. That was quickly thrown out the window after Quebecor stepped in, along with many interesting R&D projects. That could have been big in a few years, but thank to the short sightedness of greedy PK Peladeau, Videotron will miss the boat. PKP managed to suck the soul out of the company to make it the most profitable for his short-sighted, greedy, spoiled kid mind.
I don't know if you can tell, but I don't like him too much either.
We have to have something to do while we're stuck in our homes half the year, avoiding polar bears...
It's probably just a result of our high urbanization rate. With most people congregated in fewer, larger cities, it makes rolling out services like broadband a lot easier.
(getting even further offtopic...)
It appears Paul Martin is Bushs .
I disagree: Paul Martin is not a Bush... He jsut has a nice hole and is getting ready to bend over in case Bush decides he needs to use it...
TELUS has recently started this. In co-operation with PureTracks, you can purchase songs from a large assortment of albums for 99 cents a song, legally. I don't really know the details for it as I just use P2P to download songs illegally but it seems to be fairly popular as they've sold 1,000,000 songs already in the 4 months it has been operating. If you can't stop people from doing something, at least make money off of it
"Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not open source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested." (LT 2004)
So it looks like recording industry want's it BOTH ways....pay the RIAA tax on all recordable media AND expect to be raided.....it really shows that the only thing these guys are interested in is money....they rip off the consumers and the artists and everyone else they can......
Why is one insult scored (-1) while the other is scored a (2)? Both are equally ignorant, offensive, stereotypical, and completely off-topic. I'm so tired of seeing the same crap on every single topic I read about here. It all turns into a nationalistic cock size contenst, usually ending up with rabble that sounds like, "We hate Bush!" "Oh yeah? Screw you, America rules!" Jesus, we can have a story here about an earthquake on Venus (or would that be a venusquake?), and the conversation will still end up at either pro vs anti American garbage, or ridiculous insults that get modded up to (2) for some reason. Sorry, didn't mean to explode like that, it's just all getting very old very fast. Debating is one thing, but there are people here who just keep walking into the wall no matter how many times you show them the door.
What's more, you have every right to get together with friends and make tape copies or digital copies of music on digital audio recording equipment.
I'm not sure what this means about copying a CD someone else bought to a tape, but copying a CD for a friend using digital audio equipment and audio cds is perfectly legal, and copying an audio tape to another audio tape is also legal. We pay a "tax" to the RIAA on every piece of digital audio equipment, audio CD, and audio tape to allow this per The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992.
Two items of interest: 1) This summer, through a fluke, I found that at least 3 unique IPS can run over TELUS' ADSL service. Technically, the DSLAMs are supposed to only allocate 2 IPs. This potentially destroys any basis for TELUS to claim unique identification of users by IP address. 2) It is possible, by looking at the HTML code for a Canadian online music retailer, to figure out how to get their entire music library to stream in high quality wma. The retailer appeared unconcerned when notified of this and deemed its exploit unlikely. Nonetheless, they've essentially made the copyrighted material "freely" and knowingly available on the web. Does anyone have feedback or thoughts on whether their actions constitute illegal file sharing per Canadian law?
You missed the Northern Pikes. USians might remember the song "She Ain't Pretty" although they had a few more hits up here. BTW, they're back together and making new music.
Videotron has been a cess-pit from the day I first heard of them. They have the distinction of being one of the first entries in my private mail server spam block list. I've only had one customer request in five years to unblock them, which I did for 24 hours. After that, the customer requested that I place them back in the block list. They decided any possible gain from being able to communicate with Videotron's customers wasn't worth the flood of spam that comes from them.
The fact that they're continuing to screw their customers is certainly no surpise to me.
"Why system administrators should have to pay a levy to the music industry in order to archive data to CD is a bit hazy."
Audio-blanks are a lot more expensive than Data-blanks because they have the legit copying levy + pirating levy on them. Data-blanks only have the pirating levy on them, since it's assumed that audio blanks are used for audio, and data blanks for PCs and pirating.
Not quite accurate, naturally, but not as uneven as you seem to think.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Speaking as an anglo-saxon, I'd unfortunately have to agree with your assessment of that comment
Here in Canada, Quebec is famous for refusing to go along with anything that the Federal government or other provincial governments want to do. Unless it somehow results in them getting more money or more rights. Subject of course to them being able to use the funds however they wish.
As opposed to being drained of money and refused rights, wich is what the federal goverment and the other provinces are famous for going along with.
Those inferior second class citizens should really learn their place in life and accept their domination quietly huh?
You can't take the sky from me...
WRONG. Go read sections 79-82 of the Canada Copyright Act. It allows me to make a copy onto an "audio recording medium." "audio recording medium" is defined:
"audio recording medium" means a recording medium, regardless of its material form, onto which a sound recording may be reproduced and that is of a kind ordinarily used by individual consumers for that purpose, excluding any prescribed kind of recording medium;
So, if individual consumers ordinarily put mp3s on their hard drives, a hard drive becomes an "audio recording medium" under section 79.
Refer to: Copyright Act (Canada)
The Globe and Mail also reported this story in today's paper. I think it is interesting that Shaw is attempting to use new privacy laws to protect the people in question. If the courts rule in favour of the ISPs, it will set a good precedent.
What it tells the bands is that you won't be doing business with them if they continue to do business with their respective labels.
Not a bad idea IMO
It seems like there's some grey area in terms of who's actually doing the copying. If I leave all my CDs out on the street and someone borrows one of them and copies it, then the law wouldn't be broken. Leaving all your CDs out on the net and having someone copy them seems to be the equivalent for P2P. Doesn't someone's computer technically have to "ask" to borrow the bits before they can be sent?
Canada Leads US in Broadband Usage
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Certainly newsworthy, if only because it's somewhat related to one of the biggest US stories of the last few years, so It's appropriate that /. posts it.
But, this is very early. It will take a while to play out, and there will be more news to come.
Before any of this can even get off the ground, there's Privacy Legislation to consider. Not a one of these ISPs can comply with the demand for names (even if they are suspected of wanting to, such as some have said about Videotron) unless they vet the order with whole bunch of lawyers.
Chances are the lawyers will nix it right there; the penalties for complying if it violates the Privacy Act are very serious, and will be assessed on the ISPs themselves.
Certainly CIRA is not a law-enforcement agency, and John Law won't be investigating any part of a civil complaint. So, a court order will have to compel the ISPs to provide any information before any of this can start.
Canadian courts can consider judgments from any jurisdiction, so although it won't be a legal precedent that must be followed, the recent US cases denying the names to the RIAA will almost certainly be part of the ISPs arguments against complying.
Then there's the matter of violations of the Copyright Act. It's quite clear that uploading music is against the law (there are quite a few paragraphs in the legislation that spells out a wide variety of specific examples), so not much problem there.
Finally, there's the matter of penalties. This is where it gets kind of strange. CIRA can't hope to get much money from anyone it successfully sues; there's no statutory penalty scheme as in the US and even if there were, Canadian law requires penalties to fit the level of harm.
The penalty phase would be pure speculation, but as food for thought I expect the courts are going to value the cost of uploading a song in mp3 format as worth perhaps 99 cents if they base it on market value (PressPlay online music store in Canada). That's 99 cents once. Next song, next 99 cents.
I would be shocked if they value it higher without any financial gain from the defendant; cases of "true piracy" (1) don't extend much beyond confiscation and a fine loosely based on the value of goods duplicated.
Certainly I could be wrong, but I don't see anyone getting dinged for anything even remotely approaching the statutory penalty for a single instance of infringement in the US.
CIRA can hope to get some favorable rulings, and wave that around as a warning to others. But the cost of each prosecution is going to vastly exceed the value of a judgment, although they might be awarded costs as well.
And there's great danger in a precedent that doesn't advance CIRA's position (starting with the Privacy Law obstacle). It's risky for them to start this stuff up, but since they have, we can assume they're willing to accept the risk.
(1) I've used the definition of Piracy used by IFPA, the umbrella organization for such national agencies as CIRA and the RIAA. They define Piracy as commercial copying and sales of CDs; essentially what legislatures refer to as Counterfeit duplication. By their own definiton, sharing music is not Piracy, which is why I used the phrase "true piracy" here.
I'm well aware that the term Piracy itself is somewhat controversial, but I take the position that English is a living language and definitions are as much about use as references in dictionaries.
Irony!? 50%+1 IS democracy!
The levy is based on the fact that personal copying is LEGAL, and detracts from their potential income.
Not because of piracy.. it's because of what you are already legally permitted to do.. it was a concession to the recording industry when we took away their right to prevent us from making home copies.
I don't pay a cent to the RIAA when I buy CD-Rs here in Virginia. You'd better find someone else to blame for that bad policy -- America isn't responsible for this one, you guys came up with it on your own.
Besides, people keep telling me that it's wrong to label other nations as evil, but for some reason that doesn't apply when they get to talking about America.
The reasoning behind this, as I recall, was that a filename is hardly bona fide proof of the actual content of the file. For a really simple example, someone could rename a copyrighted file with the name of a file in the public domain. You would not know until it landed on your drive and you played it back; therefore it is not fair to hold you culpable for infringing on the copyright as you were duped.
Since there's no real way to tell a copyrighted file from anything else (at a distance, so to speak)... downloading is legal, since it could have completely legitimate purposes.
Uploading copyrighted work is not legal and pretty straightforward although I'm sure much will be made of the fact that many P2P applications share by default... which I'm not sure a lot of people know...
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
and the french are not know for predjudism and bias at all I suppose?
Face it, both sides have their faults in this department.
If I can't smoke and swear I'm fucked.
I still think copying the file from internet still falls into a grey area since it's not the original comercial medium.
Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
Maybe I'm just not noticing, but, I've only seen regular CDR's with no distinction as to what you can record on them? I usually just get spindles of 50 or 100 when they go on sale 'free with rebate'....they usually put the slim line cases on sale same way..so, for the price of a couple of stamps and sales tax..I get all the media I want. I've put data and music on them just fine.
So, what am I missing here?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Don't upload RIAA music. They don't care how much independent stuff you have, just music under their copyright protection, which is largely garbage anyway.
If you uploaded 50-cent you deserve to be sued, not because of copyright infringement but simply for having bad taste.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
translates to
"Warning to fellow thieves and criminals: The Fuzz are coming! Watch out"
That's not troll baiting... that's a simple sad fact.. why are you so pro piracy?
Once again... read the Act. Perhaps it's an oversight and they'll fix it in the next version, but there is no indication that the media you copy it _from_ must be a legal copy. It very simply says that it is not an infringement of the copyright act for me to make a private copy of a recording of a musical work for my personal use. You could argue that this does NOT cover my personal taping of a live show. However, it technically _would_ allow me to make a copy of _your_ recording of that live show. In that case it's you, not me, breaking the law. The prosecution may have a chance by arguing about the "spirit" of the law. What I'm arguing here is the "letter." There are times when the spirit can take precedence over the letter. I know, because I'm involved in a fight including this aspect right now.
Of course, IANAL. (but I have paid way too many thousands of dollars to lawyers in the past year.)
Some background: I've lived all over the country, from Vancouver to Calgary to Toronto. I've never lived in Quebec, although I've spent a good amount of time there, both in Montreal and Quebec City.
I wonder though, exactly how much the average Quebecois really knows about the rest of the country - especially those that do not speak English.
It depend on which cake you are talking about. We pay federal taxes too, you know.
Yes you do, but in case you haven't noticed, a much larger percentage of senior federal politicians, civil servant, military generals and such are all from Quebec. The fact is, the last non-Quebecois to be PM for more than 12 months was Lester B. Peason - in 1968!
So who is it that you as a Quebecois have an issue with? The Federal Gov't is more a tool of Quebec than it is of english Canada.
Second, a country where the influence of my people is not diluted by the rest of the federation.
I point you again to my previous point. What dilution, exactly?
The seperatist viewpoint stems largly from ignorance of the "rest of Canada". Such ignorance fails to take into acount that for instance, socially BC is far closer to Quebec than to Alberta. The "rest of Canada" doesn't exist outside of Quebec. It's a shame that seperatists like yourself fail to see this.
Keep in mind that the only thing that has prevented Quebec from becoming either primarily anglophone or completely irrelavent is the fact that is is part of a greater institution called Canada. Unfortunate, but true nonetheless.
Now, this does not negate the fact that within Canada, Quebec has a unique place - it's own laws, institutions and language - but make no mistake, Quebecois (as those from any area of the country) are best served by a strong union, regardless of our differences, than by any other method of government.
How could you, as a Quebecois think that Quebec as a nation would fair better without the protection of a G8 country standing between it and the economic and "cultural" behemoth that is the USA?
The only reason you speak french at all is because of Canada. Don't believe me? I have one word for you: Louisiana.
Your citation was not complete. The proper URL to Section 80 (Copying for Private Use) is: http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#rid-33770
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act described in that subsection is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c):
(a) selling or renting out, or by way of trade exposing or offering for sale or rental;
(b) distributing, whether or not for the purpose of trade;
(c) communicating to the public by telecommunication; or
(d) performing, or causing to be performed, in public.
So basically, because the file sharer's are using (2)(c), ie they are communicating to the public by telecommunication, they are not subject to the exclusion of infringement in 80 (1).
It's important to read _all_ of the subsections, even if they are a gordian knot of exclusions and exceptions.
What's really screwy is that I can let someone copy my entire 90 gigabyte self-ripped MP3 collection, but if I make the copy FOR them, I'm infringing.
Definition arises when you don't get hte same bit back.
Essentially you are standing on the corner with a sign that says "Free copied CD's" Take your pick
Which is distributing, and illegal.
Yo Grark
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
I find this marvelous!
First they raise my rates $5/month, now they will help their customers get sued!!
Interesting. I imagine that the Canadian RIAA is targeting users with massive song collections, whom they consider the "kingpins" of the network. This is probably the right approach- as many analyses of the subject have shown, a disproportionately small group of users serves up most of the filespace available on any such network.
I'm more interested in small-worlds sort of stuff- it's less actionable (while there is likely to be a relative "kingpin" in each small sphere as well, he represents less influence) and probably better targeted (no one I know likes Britney or will ever have her stuff offered- so it is less obvious in general.)
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Just to give you an idea of how bad that levy is, retail prices of CD-Rs here in the Toronto area is about $35cdn for a spindle of 100 CDs, or about $0.35 cents each. Of that retail price, 21 cents goes straight to the music industry. The remaining 14 cents covers the retailer's profits, manufacturer's profits, and the costs of manufacturing and distributing the CD-Rs.
In short, the music industry is sitting back and taking 2/3 of the money from all CD-R sales in Canada, and then claiming that using those CD-Rs to make copies of music is theft. I think that somone needs to review their definition of theft.
cross border shopping does us in again....
Considering your atrocious use of english language in this thread, of which I up until this point have not mentioned, perhaps it's the arrogance of the listener, and not the speaker than causes the lack of understanding. But I digress.
I'd like to see where you get the idea that a majority of senior civil servant and military general are French Canadian.
I didn't say Quebecois are the majority, only that they were over represented. As for numbers: in 1997, 29.5% of the civil service was from Quebec, even tough in 2001 Quebec's population was on 21% of Canada's total population.
Indeed, people in Quebec don't know much about the ROC,
Well, ignorance, even admitted ignorance is not an excuse. I would start by saying that the entity known as ROC doesn't exist outside of a seperatist's head.
What prevented Quebec from becoming primarly anglophone is the fact that, in spite of being a minority in the federation, we are a majority in our own "province" and act as such.
You wouldn't be a provice without Canada, and as francophones you'd be the minority in North America... like I said elsewhere, Quebec's story without Canada would be similar to Louisiana's.
Once again though, your ignorance of Canada preceeds you. Many communities in Manitoba are exclusivly french (so much so that I, and other soldiers had difficulty communicating during the Manitoba flood of 1997.), and the province of New Brunswick is actively bilingual. They're not irrelevant in the least.
The little autonomy and institution we have, we constantly have to fight to keep
Funny, I don't remember the federal government trying to change your civil code, language laws (even though they violate the constitution) or social programs... can you?
There is nothing the federal governement would like more than to make us "just another province"
And where prey tell, did you get the idea that you are somehow entitled to be anything more?
You have every right to want you own country. But keep in mind that I have every right to keep mine from being destroyed. That's a lose lose situation, and not one that I'd like to see happen to Canada (including Quebec). We've both got it good. The grass isn't any greener on the other side... ask an Irishman if you think otherwise.
I guess it only applies to US citizens these days. Unless they wear turbans...
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
Too late, Australia's got it now :-)
Or maybe these guys just beat them to it...
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
I must not understand this correctly, but when i read section 80.(2) i see there there are limitations base from subsection 1. I interpret this as not being able to copy for personal use if it falls into the limitations. This to me means i am not supposed to copy from rented media, internet, radio, and public shows.
Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
Well, you know what they say - the victor writes the history books. ;)
This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.
Quebecor is Archambaut .
Archambault is Archambaultzik.ca
Of course they're delighted, they even threatened their own customers already.
That's criminal.
Yup. There are CDs made especially for audio recording - they have a special "audio header" on them that identifies them as made for audio recording.
Old CD audio recorders used to require this type of media, they wouldn't work with normal CD-R media. The idea being that if you restricted the burners to audio-only CD-Rs, you could tax those more (usually 4-8x more) and leave the data CDs alone.
Of course, everyone screamed bloody murder and worked out hacks to enable recording on regular CDs. Manufacturers who made machines that worked on regular CDs got all the business and manufacturers who made the "crippled" units hardly sold anything.
Little wonder that you never see them anymore.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Okay, I'm actually trying to think this through logically while typing it...
:-)
Section 80.(2):
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act described in that subsection is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c):
Let's start by reducing "the things..." Those things are, in simple english, three ways of saying "a recording of a song."
I would also like to reduce (2)a-d to "distribution in any form" to make this argument simpler. I will keep in the back of my mind that, for our purposes, "distribution" includes "public performance" and "playing it over the telephone, radio or tv." (which I would also consider "public performance")
And "Subsection (1) does not apply..." == "You are not allowed to make a personal copy..."
so...
You are not allowed to make a personal copy if the making of that copy is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to "a recording of a song.": "distribution in any form"
(Yes, that is awkward. I'll fix it later.)
Does that "recording of a song" refer to either the source media or the destination media, or to the musical content of the recording irregardless of what media it is on?
1. If it refers to the source media, it means you can't make a personal copy for the purposes of distributing the original. While at first read, that statement seems to make some sense, it is not really logical. The act of making a personal copy is not connected with distributing the original. (Aside from the fact that you may _wish_ to make a copy before you sell your CD to someone else. The two actions are not interdependant.)
2. If it refers to the destination media, it means you can't make a personal copy for the purposes of distributing that copy. Simply put, I can't make a "personal copy" and then sell it on the street corner. I can't make a "personal copy" and then _give_ it to my best friend. In fact, to take that two steps farther, if I happen to be a DJ and I dutifully pay my royalties to SOCAN to allow me to play my CDs at dances, I am still not allowed to use my "personal copies" due to (2)d. (2d makes no sense outside of this interpretation, as it is illegal anyways for me to publicly play even my _bought_ CDs without paying additional "public performance" royalties to SOCAN.)
3. It is impossible to distribute a song unless it is either on a media or you publicly perform it. This section of the Copyright Act does not address making a sound recording of a public performance, and we have already discussed the two "media" possibilities above.
So, I would argue that my interpretation 2 makes the most sense. To reword my previous rewording of 80.(2):
You are not allowed to make a personal copy of a recording of a song if the making of that copy is done for the purpose of "distributing in any form" "a recording of a song."
Please let me know if you see any logical errors in my interpretation.
Once again, I am a computer programmer, not a Lawyer. I have to think logically and precisely every day, but I don't usually have to convince a judge or jury that I am right... just the compiler.
p.s. after re-reading all of this and section 80, you may have a point. 80.(1)(a)to(c) sound like they could be referring to the source media. (i.e. you "reproduce" the "source", not the "destination") I still stand by my statement that making a copy and distributing the original are independant of each other. Also, my interpretation 1 would possibly open up your legal options of what you can do with your _copy_. I'm sure that's not what they intended when they wrote this law.
canada: the largest french population that never surrendered to anyone, ever.
so neener neener.
it's called America Off Line
Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
In Canada, every time i purchase blank media, i pay a tax which goes directly to the CRIA to defray their supposed lost revenue due to filesharing. Since i burn backups of all my customer's websites, all the software generated by my development company, my personal files, etc. I end up forking out a lot of bread to an industry who are (IMO) practicing government sanctioned profiteering.
My legitimate use of writeable media does not exempt me from this levy.
Now they're going to hunt for music swappers are they? How cute.
I Suggest, to every other Canadian who may read this, and who burns their own files to CDR that they begin to loudly and belligerently refuse to pay the blank media levy.
I am neither an advocate nor an opponent of file sharing, but if we're paying for it already (and we are) the music industry cant have it both ways.
For anyone unfamiliar with the Canadian blank media levy, you can read about it here
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml
No, there's a levy on both kinds of CDs. It's even higher on "music" CDRs and CDRWs, but there is absolutely a levy on data CDs.
From a govt. web site, the current rates:
- Audio cassettes (of 40 minutes or more in length): 29 each
- CD-R and CD-RW: 21 each
- CD-R Audio, CD-RW Audio and MiniDisc: 77 each
- For non-removable memory permanently embedded in a digital audio recorder: $2 for each recorder that can record no more than 1 Gb of data, $15 for each recorder that can record more than 1 Gb and no more than 10 Gbs of data, and $25 for each recorder that can record more than 10 Gbs of data.
#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes ,
Just so that everyone is clear. It's LEGAL to download music on the internet in Canada. However, it's illegal to upload Music to the internet in Canada.
Dolemite
_________________________
Save the World! Use a Quote!
I'm reading this comment and envisioning an ankle-biting 12-year old who just finished Social Studies 9 and is itching to dive into politics. Sorry kiddo, but Paul Martin has nothing to do with these lawsuits.
Canada has had its own intellectual property laws for a long time and they are generally quite similar to those enforced in the US. Under the Canadian Copyright Act, as amended in 1998, the RCIA has every right to pursue legal action against individuals who provide access to content for which they do not own distribution rights.
Don't get me wrong, I'm just as upset about the RCIA as you are (and I'm no fan of Mr. Martin), but I think you need to hit the books a little harder before you start blindly hurling allegations. For one thing, the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the US have very different jobs - they are in charge of different branches of government. There are plenty of reasons to accuse the Canadian PM of "fascism" (i.e. Ottawa's lack of accountability), but this isn't one of them.
(One more thing, Canuck to Canuck: if you want to be taken seriously, you should really learn how to use your apostrophes, especially when you're calling our neighbours to the South "stupid". They tend to carpet bomb in response to attacks like that.)
...Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.
Churchill
Bollywood -- it is not Hollywood. Please call it by its name "Mumbai film industry". Please do not have to use the white-man's crutch to typify yourself. Hollywood is not a good thing to aspire for.
That said, the Mumbai industry is a different bag of trash.