Slashdot Mirror
Canadian High Court Says ISPs Don't Owe Royalties
canwaf writes "According to the CBC, and the other guys: In a 9-0 decision, Canada's highest court ruled, despite the fact that ISPs provide the means for piracy, they are not liable for what people download. They continue in their decision that Internet access providers are not bound by federal copyright legislation. Coupled with an earlier story on Slashdot, this is a very good thing." Edward Scissorhands was one of many readers to link to the Globe and Mail's article, too.
There is already a CD-R levy in Canada. It was created when the Copyright Act was rewritten to allow copying of any kind for personal use.
In Soviet America the banks rob you!
the highest court cannot be overruled.
In
Screw 'em
Trolling is a art,
I hope it won't be overruled by others who might qualify the infrastructure they provide as a medium, like the CDR which are taxed in France and other countries.
It is pretty hard to overrule the SUPREME COURT.
As it usually does, the Canadian Supreme Court has made a sensible ruling here.
Speaking of CDRs, as a Canadian I pay levies (which are forwarded to the record companies) on all blank media that I purchase, so as far as I'm concerned I'm ALREADY paying for my right to copy music, even if it comes from the internet. Its a relief that my ISP won't be forced to contribute to that racket as well.
Don't forget that most of that money winds up going to Bryan Adams and Celine Dion anyway (I'll remind everyone here that the Canadian government has already apologized for Bryan Adams on several occasions, so please lets not start that discussion again!)
Not "any kind". Only musical audio recordings (no spoken word is permitted), and only the person doing the copying is permitted to use the recording (so you can copy your friends shit, but he can't copy it and give it to you).
not to mention bud is basically legal there!
If by "basically legal" you mean "in practice," then you're basically right. The police tend not to make much effort to prosecute for marijuana possession in Canada.
This is way off-topic, but I want to dispel a misconception. Conan O'Brien once mentioned on his talk show that "Canada's parliament is considering legalizing marijuana..." This was so inaccurate as to be totally incorrect. In fact, at the time, there was a senate committee report that recommended that parliament consider decriminalizing marijuana.
So it wasn't parliament, by which one typically means the House of Commons (the elected lower house), it was the Senate (the unelected upper house). And it wasn't even the whole Senate, but just a committee. They weren't "considering," it was just a report that made a recommendation. And nobody was talking of legalization, just decriminalization, the difference being that it's still not legal, but you just wouldn't get thrown in jail, nor will you get a criminal record for possession - just a fine, rather like a traffic violation.
Some time later, a decriminalization bill was proposed in the House of Commons, but I believe it was dropped when the election was called about a month ago, so there has been no movement by the government in terms of actual legislation. So marijuana possession is, officially, still quite illegal here.
But we actually have the funny single-platform Marijuana Party fighting for legalization here in Canada, so who knows... Maybe someday it will be legal.
Accountability on the heads of the powerful.
Power in the hands of the accountable.
SOCAN isn't poor. SOCAN has LOTS and LOTS of cash.
The reason being that every artist and label in the country pays into them, and they charg for radio play of members' music pretty much everywhere.
In fact, I remember a lawsuit with a local restaurant who was playing CDs over the stereo system and got the stick from SOCAN because he wasn't paying his royalties (not that there was much sympathy in the community for him, since that guy was a raging asshole).
I could be wrong on the details, but I'm sure that SOCAN has a lot of agreements that allow them to pull in the cash. Not on the scale of American record industry groups, granted, but in Canadian terms, they ain't broke.
Here's a link to their "Tariff" system, which details how they charge whom, and where: SOCAN Tariffs
You're absolutely right. The people with the most money (media companies) want to attack those with less (ISPs and private citizens). That way they can get even more money and have less and less chance to have someone compete against them.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
This ruling is good news (and in line with the Supreme Court's earlier rulings protecting individual privacy). But the fight is not over, trust me. The Heritage Committee, in their report just last month, outlined their plans for ratifying WIPO and wants to change the laws governing ISP responsibility.
Now parliament is out, an election was just held, and the same Liberal party is back in power (minority) with a loose coalition with the NDP party -- who quite strongly supports ratifying WIPO. So I fear that we're going to see Canadian government ratify WIPO, bringing in DMCA-like legislation into Canada. Check out the Digital Copyright Canada forums and get involved if these privacy rights concern you. There is also a national petition for user's rights that you can sign if you are concerned about all these 'special laws' for digital media. Remember that we live in a digital world, but the general public does not realize this. Placing strange restrictions on digital information is just hurting ourselves, and our own industries.
Email sent to Heritage Minister and Prime Minister:
& u=/washpost/ 20040330/tc_washpost/a34300_2004mar29
b /ind ex_e.cfm.
Honourable Ms. Scherrer;
I have heard your recent comments about seeking to change the Copyright Act.
I would urge you to consider very carefully what steps are taken in any changes to this act. As the act stands, Canadians pay a levy on
recordable media, money from which specifically goes to the music industry in compensation for supposed lost revenues.
As such if the law is changed, I would also expect any media levies to be immediately lifted, as the proper method for handling any cases
of copyright infringement would then fall to the music industry and the legal system of Canada, and not to a discriminatory levy applied
to the majority of law-abiding citizens.
Beyond this, the issue of whether revenues are lost at all is entirely debatable, as you can see in this story from the Washington Post
citing a study done by two university researchers specializing in economics:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story
This issue of copyright is a very important one to me because those countries that address the issue properly stand to be at the
fore-front of the information economy. Limiting information flow to prop up business models that simply are no longer feasible is not the
way to go about this.
Thank you for your time.
Me
Response received
On behalf of Ms. Hélène Chalifour Scherrer, Minister of Canadian
Heritage, thank you for your correspondence regarding potential changes to
the Copyright Act and expressing your views regarding the private copying
levy on blank audio recording media.
Ms. Chalifour Scherrer appreciates your advising her of your views
and has noted your comments with respect to these matters. Policy
developments abroad encouraged the establishment of private copying levies
for the benefit of authors, performers and producers of sound recordings
long before Canada decided to establish such mechanisms. The private
copying levy has been promoted as the only efficient mechanism to offset
increasing reproduction capacity made available through developments in
consumer electronics.
The levy on blank audio recording media was developed to apply
generally on all media ordinarily used by consumers to copy music for their
private use. Accordingly, the law governing the levy was drafted to give
the Copyright Board of Canada, a specialized tribunal, the authority and
discretion necessary to accurately evaluate the appropriate portion of
music copied onto some of the media used by consumers for any digital data.
It should be noted that the Government is not involved in the
collection, administration or distribution of the levy; these tasks are
carried out by the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC). Detailed
information on the levy is outlined on the CPCC Web site at
http://cpcc.ca/english/about.htm and the Copyright Board Web site at
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/index.html.
Information and updates on the copyright reform process, including
issues on file sharing and the private copying levy, are available on the
Department of Canadian Heritage Web site at
http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/ac-ca/progs/pda-cp
I trust that this information is useful. Please accept our best
wishes.
So, essentially, go ask THOSE people..
"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)