Anti-DMCA Petition in Canadian Parliament

Matthew Skala writes "Last month we heard that the Canadian government is rejecting some of the worst features of the DMCA (more analysis here), but with Heritage Minister Liza Frulla parroting the media-cartel lobby with a promise to "give the tools to companies and authors to sue" and persuade children that downloading music for free is morally wrong even though it's presently legal in Canada, the battle is far from won. Yesterday, Member of Parliament Peter Julian (Burnaby-New Westminster, NDP) introduced the first batch of signatures on Digital Copyright Canada's Petition for Users' Rights. This isn't just a Web click-through petition that politicians can freely ignore; more than a thousand real hardcopy signatures have already been collected from Canadian residents opposed to further expansion of copyright privileges, and the campaign is hoping for many more. Additional coverage on p2pnet.net."

Comments

The NDP isn't in power.

[Tackhead]

...and is therefore irrelevant in a Parliamentary system. Unlike the States, where Representatives and Senators can attach riders, opposition parties in parliamentary systems typically have zero say in what goes into laws.

And this, being a petition, is even weaker than an amendment to a bill.

I've re-parsed and summarized the article:

> This isn't just a Web click-through petition that politicians can freely ignore; more than a thousand real hardcopy signatures have already been collected

...that the politicians can freely ignore.

Re:The NDP isn't in power.

[ytwang]

The NDP isn't irrelevant. The current government has a minority of seats, so if all the opposition parties vote against a proposed piece of legislation, then it won't pass.

Re:The NDP isn't in power.

[Ubergrendle]

Except we currently have a minority government, which means the Liberals have to tread very carefully to avoid losing the confidence of the house.

Also, given the latest sponsorship scandal (biggest scandal in Canadian politics in the last 10, maybe 20 years) the opposition parties will be looking for publically popular positions to use to 'gang up' on the ruling party.

This petition has some weight given its timing, and private member's bills have been known to successfully be passed...especially during minority governments.

Re:The NDP isn't in power.

[JustDisGuy]

"The NDP isn't in power...and is therefore irrelevant in a Parliamentary system"

Erm - WTF are you talking about? This isn't an "NDP" initiative, and even if it were our government is currently a MINORITY government, which gives all MP's, especially those sitting in opposition, significantly more power.

While I do not doubt that the politicians WILL ignore it, I think they do so at their peril. And just because I have no hope that they will lend credence to the petition does not mean I will not get everyone I know to sign it and send it to Parliament Hill in my MP's hands.

Re:The NDP isn't in power.

[peg0cjs]

Only failed confidence votes bring down the government (e.g. the budget). Free votes fail all the time, it just means that the piece of legislation dies.

Weather The NDP is in power or not...

[Wacky_Wookie]

Peter Julian is the Member Parliament (MP) for that area. So anyone who gets 25 or more signitures for there area must take their copy of the petition to their MP, weather their in "power" or not!

My MP (Jaff Brya Victoria-Becon Hill, [Libral]) happens to be a member of the ruling party, and ther more MP's whose contsituants ask their MP's to Present the petition to Parliament the stronger it looks!

Here is the Cool part: If I am correct, only 25 signitures are needed for each MP, so the more Rideings (Canadian for an MP's electoral district) who collect signitures, the better!

Copied from MY OWN AC post cus I forgot to turn cookies on in Firefox!

Re: Weather The NDP is in power or not...

[Anonymous Coward]

So anyone who gets 25 or more signitures for there area must take their copy of the petition to their MP, weather their in "power" or not!

Actually, MPs can introduce petitions with signatures from anywhere in Canada as long as they have a bunch from their own riding. Peter Julian was chosen for the first batch because many of the signatures were in his area, and the petition organizers were able to convince him to support the cause. His being an NDP member isn't particularly relevant. This is an issue that cuts across party lines - you could just as well say that the Right should support the petition because expanded copyright laws are government-sponsored monopolies and harm the free market.

Please DO talk to your local MP about this, but it would be better to send your collected petition signatures to Digital Copyright Canada rather than sending them to your local MP, because the petition organizers are trying to collect them into well-organized batches, remove duplicates, and have them presented by the MPs who will bring us the greatest benefit. Submitting a petition to Parliament is a bit complicated if you want to do it in the proper way that compels them to pay official attention.

Re:Get the facts straight.

[Anonymous Coward]

Downloading commercial music without payment is not.

Actually, if by "downloading" you mean making a personal copy of someone else's commercial music, then you're wrong.

The Canadian Copyright Act specifically allows personal copies of music to be made. The U.S.A. has never had an equivalent exclusion in its copyright laws.

Re:I'm downloading the petition now.

[aardvarkjoe]

Are you absolutely sure that the "fansub" was really a fan-produced version? On occasion, the fansubs that you can get on the internet are actually just rips of a DVD from one of the Asian markets that happens to include English subs. Most of the reputable places that host fansubs try to weed those out, but if you downloaded them from usenet or IRC, that might have been what you ended up with.

Not saying that's neccessarily what happened here, but that would be my first guess given the situation you described. If you're really interested, you could contact the company that has the legitimate rights to distribute the show in the US, and ask whether the DVD you bought was legit or not.

Re:Get the facts straight.

[tricops]

Here's actual information related to its current legality in Canada... right here. It is currently legal to download personal copies. Whether that status will change, who knows...

Re:Morality in Government.

[UlfGabe]

sorry i saw those same numbers as congress, i call bullshit, so show your cards.

Re:Morality in Government.

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out Snopes

The parent is full of BS. It shouldn't be modded up.

Re:Morality in Government.

[Anonymous Coward]

Internet hoax uses Citizen as source: Message accuses MPs of criminal activity; [Final Edition]
Glen McGregor. The Ottawa Citizen. Ottawa, Ont.: Apr 13, 2001. pg. A.5

i.e. This is old!

Re:I'm downloading the petition now.

[Yaztromo]

British Troops burned the white house (canada wasnt a country in the war of 1812, still a british territory).

no, im not a history geek....

And boy, does it show.

At the time of the War of 1812, there were two territories with the name "Canada" in them -- Upper Canada, and Lower Canada. People who lived in those territories were known as "Canadians" (or, in the case of Lower Canada, "les Canadiens").

A group can be a people with having a nation. Ever hear of the Kurds? The Palestinians? The Welsh?

There was a Canada before Confederation, and the people who lived there were Canadians. Yes, they were British subjects (although their loyalties to the British crown certain varied -- Native Canadians and French Canadians also participated in the War, but generally held no special loyalty to the crown), but there is nothing preventing anyone from calling them "Canadians", and being perfectly understandable and correct when they do so.

Yaz.

There's another way to look at it

[Anonymous Coward]

First, let me clear something up: it is not legal to copy music because of the levy. The act of copying music for personal use became legal before the levy was imposed. The levy was imposed only afterwards, to compensate the music industry for the preceived loss of revenue from the legality of copying.

Morality and the Canadian Copyright Act: The underlying philosophy of the Act is that no matter what we do, people will copy music for free, and if we make such an act illegal, there's no way to enforce it, so why bother. The Act basically tells the music industry to find some other way to make money, e.g. the levy, or live performances, or selling t-shirts, or just don't charge the cost of 4+ happy meals for each CD. It doesn't say that it's moral, it just says that it'll be as stupid to outlaw it as it would be to outlaw people standing outside stadiums and listening to a concert.

But never, never forget: (1) the levy came after the Act. (2) It's not legal because of the levy, it's just legal to copy music for personal use, levy or not.