Canada To Introduce Copyright Law Next Week

P Starrson writes "A leading Canadian television network is reporting that the Canadian government will introduce copyright legislation next week that will bring DMCA-like provisions north of the border. Amazingly, the Canadian recording industry, which previously praised the reforms, now says they aren't good enough. Canadian law prof Michael Geist cuts through the spin in the pair of blog postings titled Fact and Fiction and CRIA's New Take on Copyright Reform."

Comments

No Surprise

[IAmTheDave]

No surprise that the Canadian music industry isn't happy with the wording. They pushed for this legislation and got it, so now they will push for harsher legislation. It's like a small child that pushes and pushes a parent to see how far they can get and how much they can get away with.

Re:No Surprise

[Roger_Wilco]

Don't be so sure it will pass.

Canada has a minority government right now; at least two parties need to go for it, or it's dead.

(Yes, we have more than two parties --- it's a democracy! :P )

Re:No Surprise

[DeathFlame]

Yeah we have multiple parties, but whent here is a majority government, anything they say goes, since there is nothing to oppose them.

While I see a lot of stuff getting blamed on Bush, he has to get things through congress and the house as well (I think, I know only a small amount about the US system with their three branchs)

So sometimes I think that the US system is more democratic in that respect.

Re:No Surprise

[reidbold]

Canada also has a senate through which laws-to-be must pass.

Re:No Surprise

[DeathFlame]

An unelected senate, with a Majority of liberals in it, and I get this from reading wikipedia:

In practice, however, the House of Commons is the dominant chamber of Parliament, with the Senate very rarely exercising its powers in a manner that opposes the will of the democratically elected chamber. The last major bill defeated in the Senate came in 1991, when a bill passed by the Commons restricting abortion was rejected in the Upper House by a tied vote.

So the Canadian senate is just a reason for us to pay a hundred or so people $100,000 a year to sit there and nod their heads yes.

Re:No Surprise

[reidbold]

The bills go back and forth between the senate and the house a number of times with ammendments. The party line so common in the house is not as prevalent in the senate.

Re:No Surprise

[Seek_1]

Yup, that's exactly right. That's why alot of us think the senate is just a big waste of money.

And most of the time they don't even have to show up. I seem to recall something in the news a few years ago about someone getting paid for the full year and only showing up for 49 days. (I think they ended up kicking him out once that little fact came to light..)

Re:No Surprise

[pete-classic]

We have more than to parties in the U.S. as well.

We've got the Greens.

We've got the Libertarians.

We've go the Socialists.

We've got the Communists. (Who seem to have abandoned the hammer for a gear, but they're sticking to the sickle.)

We've got the Constitution Party.

Now, there is some collusion between the two entrenched parties and the media to create a de facto two-party system. Furthermore, plurality voting creates the environment for a two-party system.

Some are willing to fight it.

-Peter

Re:No Surprise

[Medevo]

We also have Greens, Libertarians, Socialists, Communists, as well as other parties like the Marijuana party. All of these parties were offical and registered in the last federal election.

Canada still has more choice overall, having 3 [Liberals, Conservatives, NDP] (or 4 in Québec [Bloc]) major political parties. All of these parties hold significant political clout in the current minority government.

What the grandparent was likely saying is that as the in some districts Democrats and Republicans differ only a campaign symbol and who is paying. Voting for any party in the USA other then these, while is good for democracy, is unlikely to get anybody elected. While from election to election districts may sway from Republican to Democrat and vice versa, what real change occurs?

Medevo

Re:No Surprise

[pete-classic]

Where does this clout come from? Surely it comes from the fact that they have obtained a substantial number of votes in past elections.

I'm not sure how your statement that Democrats and Republicans are the same changes anything in this context. If the OP had said that CA had more than one party it would make sense. (And would show insight into our system. I often state that, "There ain't a nickel's worth of difference between a Democrat and a Republican.")

Anyway, you seem to be trying to draw some distinction in structure between the US and Canada. I can only see a difference in outcome.

Finally, just because I like it, here's an excerpt from Penn Jillette's "Sock".

-Peter

Re:No Surprise

[KillShill]

yeah, corruption in 2+ parties is better for the people.

Re:No Surprise

[hal200]

Speaking as a Canadian, I'm fairly sure it'll pass. The Liberals are introducing it, and the Conservatives won't vote against it.

A vote against this bill is a vote against the big media companies...and while we have made significant strides in reforming our campaign funding laws up here, lobbyists still have a disproportionate amount of clout with the major political parties in Ottawa.

Re:No Surprise

[gstoddart]

So the Canadian senate is just a reason for us to pay a hundred or so people $100,000 a year to sit there and nod their heads yes.

Oh, it's way over $100,000.

Other than that you have about summed it up. :-P

Re:No Surprise

[DeathFlame]

Again from wiki:

Senators are entitled to prefix "The Honourable" to their names for life. The annual salary of each senator, as of 2005, is $119,100; members may receive additional salaries in right of other offices they hold (for instance, the Speakership). Senators rank immediately above Members of Parliament in the order of precedence.

Re:No Surprise

[burySCO]

Liberals introduced it. Steve (Bush-lite) Harper, leader of the Conservatives will grovel to big business rather than oppose the Liberals on this one. I'm afraid it's as good as done :(

Re:No Surprise

[aoeuid]

Where does this clout come from? Surely it comes from the fact that they have obtained a substantial number of votes in past elections.

It comes from the fact that there are four major parties with elected members of parliament. They didn't just get a substantianal number of vosts, they actually won in many instances.

I guess the point is that in the USA, you can vote for a "third party", but it is almost a given that either a republican or democrat will win. In Canada, there used to be a real possibility that any of four parties might win a seat outside of Quebec. But two parties recently merged, so the real possibilities outside of Quebec are one of three parties might win. But that is still better than having only two. But then you add in the Quebecers, and there are four major parties in the house of commons.

Re:No Surprise

[Bobzibub]

The senate was supposed to be a "sober second opinion" where folks could look at legislation with out being swayed by the trends of the day.

Now it is sometimes a dumping ground for the loyal...
Though I see General Delaire (Sp?) is there now, so he gets my "vote" anyway.

Cheers,
-D

Re:No Surprise

[pete-classic]

Yes but what does this have to to with the parties? This is strictly a function of the electorate.

-Peter

Re:No Surprise

[compro01]

there are 4 parties with seats. the liberals, conservitives, New Democrat Party, and the Bloc Quebecous. the Green party is gaining support as a popular protest votes. and there are a lot of protesters. they are actually on the polls, with a few percent support. they might acctually get a seat or two nextr election

Re:No Surprise

[Chess_the_cat]

Canada also has a senate through which laws-to-be must pass.

The Canadian Senate is nothing more than a rubber stamp. You can count on one hand the number of times they've sent something back to the house. It's not even an elected body.

So what happened?

[Compact Dick]

I thought Canada was all for fair use? Such a concept would vanish should this come into force.

Re:So what happened?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no such concept as Fair Use in Canada. There's something called Fair Dealing, which is alot more restricted than Fair Use is in the US (primarily exemptions for Educational uses).

Re:So what happened?

[darrylballantyne]

The concept of fair use doesn't exist in Canadian law like it does in US law, so it wouldn't be something that was lost...

Drat.

[The_Wilschon]

Well crap. Here I was hoping I could move to Canada whenever it got too bad here.

Re:Drat.

[TripMaster Monkey]

I'm thinking about applying for Sealand citizenship, myself...

^_^

Re:Drat.

[MyLongNickName]

Because, of course, things get better when folks just cry and run away rather than staying and fighting.

Re:Drat.

[The_Wilschon]

Yes, but if I cry and run away, then I no longer care if it gets better. Anyway, I was kidding. I'm from Texas. I'd go to Mexico.

Re:Drat.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because, you know, one person on a moderate salary is going to make even the slightest difference in today's America.

I admire your idealism, but sometimes you just have to be realistic.

Re:Drat.

[MyLongNickName]

Don Quixote is my hero.

Re:Drat.

[xtracto]

You are welcomed in Mexico! you are still near of your loved ones and you do not have to worry about the Draconian goverment laws!

Re:Drat.

[m50d]

Yeah. That's why all America's heroes are people who stuck with their country no matter what, rather than, when faced with say religious persecution, fleeing to another continent to make a fresh start. Oh, wait.

Re:Drat.

[hosecoat]

i thought disagreeing with the government was unpatriotic.

Re:Drat.

[EvilStein]

If you wanted to, could you? I've always wondered that.. since so many Mexicans come up here, could things go the other direction at all? ;)

Re:Drat.

[The_Wilschon]

Well, I've been to Mexico before... But as far as immigration goes, I don't know. But, didn't you ever watch the Shawshank Redemption? All you need is several hundred thousand dollars cash, and an assumed name.

Re:Drat.

[ooze]

Hey...things will get better by just leaning back and watching the show. That's all you have to do. Mankind will vanish sooner or later, and all will be better.

Re:Drat.

[EvilStein]

Man, I'm a little short of that several hundred thousand dollars of cash. Hrm.

Maybe it's cheaper to get into New Zealand. that seems to be where everyyone is going anyway. ;)

this will pass without anyone noticing

[Scrameustache]

They'll only be talking about gay marriage in the news, a bill that is also scheduled to pass before summer break.

Re:this will pass without anyone noticing

[FidelCatsro]

Well Canada is likely to make it easy for homosexual marriages in the near future to have equal grounding with Heterosexual marriages which at-least shows they have respect for the rights of individuals ..
It will be rather unfortunate if it is used to cover up the Destruction of Canadians rights to Fair Use

Re:this will pass without anyone noticing

[jmrSudbury]

Don't worry. This has hit the news. CTV is a big network up here. Besides, the Canadian law makes it legal to make personal backups. This new legislation won't change that. From TFA, "The new legislation will contain rules that will make it illegal to hack or break into the digital locks often used to prevent the copying of movies and software -- although it will remain perfectly legal in Canada to copy a CD for personal use."

Canadian Recording Industry, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides Alanis Morrissette and William Shatner who else are they protecting?

Re:Canadian Recording Industry, eh?

[FidelCatsro]

*Shudder* Bryan Adams *Shudder*

Re:Canadian Recording Industry, eh?

[robertjw]

Shania Twain
Avril Lavigne

(Too women who, BTW, I would also love to 'protect')

Re:Canadian Recording Industry, eh?

[leoxx]

The Barenaked Ladies, Blue Rodeo, The Canadian Brass, The Crash Test Dummies, Moe Koffman, Natalie MacMaster, Sarah McLachlan, Nickelback, Prairie Oyster Band, Oscar Peterson, Rush, Paul Shaffer, Stoppin Tom Conners, The Band, The Sam Roberts Band, The Guess Who, Tragically Hip, Holly Cole, The Cowboy Junkies, Glenn Gould, kd lang, Daniel Lanois, Ashley MacIsaac, Joni Mitchell, Anne Murray, Our Lady Peace, Jon Kimura Parker, The Tea Party, Shania Twain, Neil Young, Hot Hot Heat, Be Good Tanyas, Jane Sibbery, Mary Margaret O'Hara, The Inbreds, Diana Krall, Broken Social Scene, Bran Van 3000, Michael Bublé, Paul Anka, Buck 65, Leonard Cohen, David Foster, Nelly Furtado, Great Big Sea, Choclair, Ben Heppner, The Headstones, Huevos Rancheros, Gordon Lightfoot, Maestro Fresh Wes, Matthew Good Band, Men Without Hats, Moxy Fruvous, The New Pornographers, The Nylons, Our Lady Peace, Platinum Blonde, Prozzak, Dayglo Abortions, Rankin Family, Robbie Robertson, Stan Rogers, Ron Sexsmith, Skinny Puppy, Sloan, Spirit of the West, Kinnie Starr, Superfriendz, Sum 41, Tegan and Sara, Roch Voisine, among many others.

Re:Canadian Recording Industry, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

you must really like our lady peace as you put them in twice.

Re:Canadian Recording Industry, eh?

[leoxx]

I put that in there to see if you were watching. Thanks for confirming that you read the entire list.

Re:Canadian Recording Industry, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

You missed Wide Mouth Mason and Big Sugar.

Not ,my country

[Anonymous Coward]

Long live quebec. We do not approve this Canadian law!!!! We're free and independant people. Calisse

Re:Not ,my country

[Anonymous Coward]

You're fooling yourself you patois prattling puke. Try disobeying the Criminal Code of Canada and see how far you get.

Your freedom and independence come from the generosity of Canadians covering your unwashed french asses. Frence doesn't even consider you french.

Re:Not ,my country

[Anonymous Coward]

In quebec, in true french fashion, videotron surrendered before the first shot in this skirmish was fired by handing over filesharer's info when it wasn't required. You can have your backward strip along the St. Lawrence.

The natives will get the rest according to original treaties.

Re:Not ,my country

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, if the law said the opposite thing, quebec would *still* be opposing it.

"We're free and independant people."

Yes, you live in canada.

"Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

It's been 9 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment"

Re:Not ,my country

[westlake]

I hope the Bloc Quebecois will vote against the law.

Minority cultures have the most to lose when the majority culture is free for the taking.

Re:Not ,my country

[homerules]

But when will Canada get it's own viable military?

Canadians and their laws and taxes...

[Anonymous Coward]

First they implement a tax that specifically redresses copyright violations... then they outlaw what the tax was supposed to pay for.

You think that media tax will go away despite becoming superfluous?

Re:Canadians and their laws and taxes...

[Anonymous Coward]

In Belgium the same things are happening.

We have high taxes on blank media (1 euro for a blank DVD) to compensate copyright owners but at the same time the local RIAA (IFPI) equivalent is crying wolf. We even had idiotic local high profile musicians that insisted that blank media are sold for the same price as an audio cd to discourages copying.

Your right to make a home copy ? How when they are stuffing everything with DRM so that the consumer can't make use of that right.

And yes that also mean that when you buy a blank cdr for burning the last debian, recordcompany's do get a small percentage of the price you paid... .

Ooh, that sucks.

[LegendOfLink]

Sorry Canadian brothers, but that's one less thing you can use when trying to make the poor argument to us Americans that we suck.

Don't feel bad, we have DMCA, the Bush Administration, and The Bachelor, three things so bad that most of the time we feel the need to heavily drink.

Better luck next time.

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahh, so you still suck then. No big suprise there.

Don't worry, your "Canadian brothers" rest easy at night knowing that well, at least we aren't dumb fucking Americans.

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[aug24]

Suddenly I feel better about Blair...

Justin.
PS Not really.

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[LegendOfLink]

LOL. At least Americans and the British can be united in having idiots as leaders.

Aren't we also supposed to think the French are silly or something like that?

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[VShael]

"feel the need to heavily drink"

You've also got American beer. So that's FOUR reasons your country sucks. :)

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that I'm supportive of the comment you responded to .. but ... 1) Quite a few of your news corrspondents are Canadian, so other than not speaking with a Southern twang, I think we have that right 2) With the US dollar falling like a rock and ever increasing deficits, you'll be pleased to know we don't pay double (not that we ever did) 3) We've already been bombed by the Americans we were helping in Afghanistan.

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[drsquare]

Tony Blair isn't an idiot, he's intelligent, he knows exactly what he's doing. He's just an egotistical cunt, that's all.

George Bush looks like a fish out of water, I don't really know what he stands for, and I don't think he does either.

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[Mashiki]

I can live with the DMCA, and the Bush administration, The Bachelor however I can not handle.

But don't worry my American friends! You too can soak in the corrupt power of Jean Chretien & Paul Martin(and their friends). A police service(CSIS) which over-rides all codes in canadian law, and ... and you can get Canadian Idol while you are at it! *drink*

Did I mention that watching anything on a satellite dish(American and other foreign dishes are also illegal) or cable TV except what's been aproved by the Government of Canada is illegal here? Right. Don't let that nasty Charter of Rights and Freedoms get in you way...just ignore it! *drink, drink, drink*

Now you know why we have lots of bars and spend a lot of time drinking up here. Wait...damn it...our 'retail outlets' for booze are also owned by the government! Will this never end!! *drink*

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[udowish]

oh, we don't need that to make the argument that Americans suck! :)

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[KillShill]

yeah, idiots that send your sons and daughters off to die based on lies that the media are complicit in, for nothing.

in the south, we call people like that not idiots, but mass murderers or sometimes war criminals.

but of course, there are cultural differences.

viva la difference.

Re:Ooh, that sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey at least we have Trailer Park Boys on Sundays and Thursdays!

Showcase, television without borders. Fuck it!

From the "turnaround" department?

[higuy48]

Is that turnaround as in about face or turnaround as "get ready to take it up the body cavity?"

Re:From the "turnaround" department?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about "from the not-polite-enough-to-give-you-the-reacharound department"? That seems more appropriate.

and...?

[brickballs]

Canada To Introduce Copyright Law Next Week

don't they already have one?

Re:and...?

[Spy der Mann]

Canada To Introduce Copyright Law Next Week

don't they already have one?

Yeah , but they hadn't introduced it anywhere. (Ouch)

I can assure you

[Anonymous Coward]

We already have copyright laws in Canada.

Yeah, mod me down, I didn't even read TFS(ummary)

So what can Canadians do?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would love to express my distaste for this proposed legislation, but so far, every single one of my inquiries to my MP have been left unanswered (I voted for the guy would took the time to reply to my questions).

What can we really do if our elected representatives choose to ignore us? Any (serious) ideas?

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[Anonymous Coward]

You write to them, and CC the person who will be running against them

Let them know that not only is this a big issue for you, but that the person they're campaigning against also knows it.

CC'ing the heritage minister is a good idea as well.

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[Frit Mock]

Ignore you representatives?

Yes, that's a serious idea, although I have to admitt, that it is a controversal one.

At least here in my country, that's what the majority of people do. (And I think that's what people do in my neighbour-countries.) ... err, no I don't live somewhere close to nowhere, I am from Germany.

I think decreasing participation in every election all ofer in central Europe is a clear sign of what people feel about their "representatives". And there are some more indicators, that "representatives" lost touch with the ones the should represent.

I am not saying, that ignoring them this is a good idea or changes anything. I am just saying, that this is what people do.

What else could we do? ... After some decades of activities, I am getting tired ... I am getting tired of demonstrations. I am getting tired throwing eggs or tomatos onto them, when the publically speak. Really I am so tired of our "representatives", I can't tell you ...

Sometime I think its realy the best to say "Fuck you!" and ignore them. At least this saves me a lot of negative emotions. ;)

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sometime I think its realy the best to say "Fuck you!" and ignore them. At least this saves me a lot of negative emotions. ;)

France and Netherlands actively voted "Fuck you!" by a large majority during the referendums. Most of the representatives pushed for the "Yes". The people answered with a very strong "No" (both by the margin and by the participation). It did not buy them anything in the short term and, contrary to what the media said, most of the voters were well aware of this. Most of the "No" voters were depicted as far-right or far-left sympathizers, which is totally absurd. People voted no for very plain reasons: the text did not make sense for the mere mortal, it should not have been called a constitution in the first place, and the European (not just the national) leaders seemed to want to extract a blank check out of the popular referendums.

Let's see if the politicians get a clue in the longer run. I'm not optimistic, though.

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[kwandar]

Personally .... I get the relevant facts about the bill together, make an appointment, and go visit them.

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[DG]

I just sent a letter to my MP.

If enough of us do it, the message will get through.

DG

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[Frit Mock]

These two referendi where rare occasions, to slap our "representatives" right into their face.

The only thing is ... there is rarly a referendum ... ask your "representatives", they know very well, why they avoid them.

"Most of the "No" voters were depicted as far-right or far-left sympathizers, which is totally absurd."

Hehe, your right thats realy absurd ... in France participation in the referendum was about 75% and ~66% voted No (if I recall the numbers halfway right.) ... 0,75*0,66 ~ 50% ... all in all half of France voters are either far-left or far-right sympathizers ... that's so absurd, that it is funny again.

Anyway, I think it's been a long time, since France did see such a huge participation in any election ... in almost every election non-voters are in a clear majority.

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[Anonymous Coward]

Any person who thinks we have democracy here in Canada is just kidding themselves. What can we do when they choose to ignore use? Absolutely NOTHING!

Does anyone really feel that writing a letter to your MP matters. Let's say they actually take the time to reply to our concerns. I've received letters saying (paraphrase): "There, there. I understand you're frustrated with the situation. Your representative is also frustrated and will address the problem in the future... blah, blah, blah, I promise this, I'll do that, we have plans to address the problem by doing this...". But very few actions are actually taken.

The fact is Canadian politics is a JOKE. If we really had democracy, then we wouldn't have the GST. In Ontario, we would be paying an extra $900 "health tax" while our health care professionals are losing jobs and there is talk about hospitals closing. How can Canadian politicians keep trading their places and views (see Jean Charest, Conservative leader turned Liberal leader and Stronach Conservative leader candiate turned Liberal).

wow... that got off topic...

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[MightyMartian]

Well, to do that, you have to know who is running against him, and thus far, with no election in site, I haven't heard of any nomination meetings anywhere near me.

Re:So what can Canadians do?

[Anonymous Coward]

As did I.

-Denize of the gaybourhood

Greetings Canada!

[crimoid]

Hey, welcome to the club.

Time to use that stationery you got for christmas

[Stavr0]

click on Find your Member of Parliament using your Postal Code
Input your postal code
Write letter (no postage necessary)

Awww Crap

[Anonymous Coward]

Just when I had thought our government was finally starting to stand up against US influences, they go and do something stupid like bring in a DMCA clone so the Recording industries can pocket even more cash...

*contemplates moving to Sweden*

Hope Bush is happy, let's see...

War for Oil....Check
Missiles in Space....Check
More Money for the Recording Industries so they can continue to fund government campaigns under the table.....Check
Blame terrorists for piracy....Check

new legislation rules

[Eric604]

The new legislation will contain rules that will make it illegal to hack or break into the digital locks often used to prevent the copying of movies and software -- although it will remain perfectly legal in Canada to copy a CD for personal use.

Re:new legislation rules

[Pofy]

>... that will
>make it illegal to hack or break into the
>digital locks often used to prevent the copying
>of movies and software...

How more precisely is the law worded? Is it ineede "prevent the copying"? Or is it like for example in US were it is more "prevent the access"? Huge difference. Because many of those protection schemes out there are not about copying at all but about accessing the content. You can usually copy it perfectly (for example if it is encrypted) yet have problem acceessing it. If it is "prevent copying", such encryption for example is not covered.

Re:new legislation rules

[imbezol]

Is this going to be the end of projects like OpenSSH and OpenSSL being primarily developed in Canada?

Re:new legislation rules

[JFitzsimmons]

What the fuck does DRM have to do with SSH and SSL? The only simmilarity that I can see is that they both use encryption in an attempt to provent access from unauthorized parties.

Re:new legislation rules

[KillShill]

by definition, that too will become illegal once the majority of the psuedo-"cd"s are copy crippled/prevented.

if you have to break a "digital lock" (more BS doublespeak) to be able to copy something (including games/software) then by definition you are NOT able to make a backup for personal use.

canada, once again the pillar of copyright freedom.

don't delude yourselves. you knew this was coming but you didn't want to take a look at reality. you've already got patriot-like acts in your country, with more to follow.

Cha-ching.

[OrinNYC]

"This is terrific news. Canada is one step closer to having a copyright law that will reflect the realities of the digital marketplace and allow the music industry a chance to prosper. We want to thank the government and the opposition parties for their support in getting to this stage."

Are they even paying attention to what's going on in the US? People -HATE- this bullshit. One would hope they take a good look at the way the the RIAA has been conducting themselves... or perhaps they are? New round of canadian lawsuits, eh? -Sidenote from TFA: "industry stakeholders who say file sharing is stealing say the laws are not stringent enough." Money makes the world go 'round... this whole thing is driven by $. Not artists rights. But you knew that.

Re:Cha-ching.

[FidelCatsro]

The Music corps are paying attention , they see people dislike it . What they also see is that people are too dammed lazy to do anything about it .So they have no real worries about trying to introduce it...

DVD Playback

[Anonymous Coward]

What does this mean for DVD playback in Linux? Am I about to become a criminal?

How do we protest?

[Ubergrendle]

Can a knowledgable slashdotter help me identify what the best way to protest this legislation will be?

I want to know about:
a) What party(s) oppose this legislation?
b) What formal protest groups exist to thwart this? Are any activities planned?


I haven't protested since university, but I would make an appearance in a rally for this. I will make donations to well organised groups opposing this legislation.

Its best to defeat the law before it gets into law, fortunately we have 3 readings to defeat it.

Re:How do we protest?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it's a minority government, so theoretically, the Libs should be on tenterhooks. I suppose the party with the best chance of success would be the Conservatives - they're always looking to piss off the Libs. However, on an ideological level, you're best off with the NDP, since they're quite left-leaning. Unfortunately, since they're currently bedpartners with the Libs, appealing to them probably isn't going to return the desired results.

As usual, it's probably best to write (not email!) your MP.

Re:How do we protest?

[RoadkillBunny]

Its best to defeat the law before it gets into law, fortunately we have 3 readings to defeat it.
No, 6. It has to go through 3 readings in the House of Commons and 3 in the House of Senate.
Probably the best way to defeat it, is to eighter write to your MP. I did it once before along with my class and we actually did something about that. But of course what they did was give us our exam earlier...

Re:How do we protest?

[qualico]

In apathetic Canada we do not protest.

It's best to just drink beer and let your criminal Prime Minister steal money from you while passing laws that are hopless to enforce yet generate tons of paper as a justification to raise your taxes.

Seriously, you can't call what we have here a government.
There is so much corruption and boondoggles, that the average Canadian just does not care about politics anymore, cause they know that any protest falls on deaf ears and the government will continue to do whatever it wants.

Re:How do we protest?

[Ubergrendle]

Given though that the Senate is essentially a rubber stamp (e.g. they do wordsmithing, legal terminology checking, etc) there's effectively only 3 levels of debate. The liberals tried to railroad the senate in the 1980s, but the PC's just stacked it with more appointed Senate seats.

I'll write my MP, but he's riding on the Liberals reputation and doesn't represent his riding's interests very well. I don't expect alot, but its a start.

Re:How do we protest?

[Sentry21]

You'll get more accomplished if you write a well-worded letter to your MP than from a rally. All rallies do are make people watching the news think that you're a bunch of whiners that are never happy with anything (which is largely true about protests). See PCU for my personal take on the whole affair.

Write your MP. We have a system, and the system doesn't work because no one uses it. Write your MP and tell them that you don't like this, and etc. etc. Write your MP, because they're the ones that are going to listen.

Re:How do we protest?

[melted keyboard]

In apathetic Canada we do not protest.

Have you ever been to Montreal? Seriously, it's hard to find a day in the year where there isn't a protest happening somewhere in the city.

Re:How do we protest?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, yeah, but I mean, most of it is generated by Concordia. They make a lot of noise for nothing, and people learn to ignore them. It's gotten so out of hand that it's a bad joke - there are printing studios that have pre-made templates: "Canada out of Wherever".

It's like I used to say, you can't even get to class because the entrances are always clogged with protesters, smokers, and smoking protesters.

(Do I sound bitter? I am bitter.)

Re:How do we protest?

[roju]

digital-copyright.ca is a meeting place for people concerned about this. The Petition for User Rights was presented to parliament recently. The mailing list is active, with draft letters, media analysis, etc.

Re:How do we protest?

[Master Ben]

Write your MP. We have a system, and the system doesn't work because no one uses it. Write your MP and tell them that you don't like this, and etc. etc. Write your MP, because they're the ones that are going to listen.

If only that were true. However most MP's, with the exception of independants, listen to their party first.

Re:How do we protest?

[kwandar]

In case no one has mentioned it, take a look at the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic. Information, action items and petitions on copyright reform.

Re:How do we protest?

[mini me]

MPs will only very rarely will vote against their party. And when they do, they are severely repremanded.

Re:How do we protest?

[qualico]

lol.

Quebec is about the only place left in Canada where you can find resistance.

Que in the, "Lower your shields..." jokes.

Re:How do we protest?

[dual_boot_brain]

Isn't that in Quebec? That would make the residents pseudo-french, which means their tendency to protest is genetic.

Re:How do we protest?

[iCEBaLM]

Boondoggles? Wow, exact wording used by the latest Conservative party request for funding mailing. Mr. Harper, is that you?

Re:How do we protest?

[Iago515]

Sigh, I'm getting tired of Canadians saying how much corruption there is in Canada. There is a huge difference between public perception of corruption http://www.legermarketing.com/documents/spclm/0204 22eng.pdf and more legitimate methods of measuring corruption http://www.transparency.org/cpi/2004/cpi2004_faq.e n.html Canada isn't ranked that bad in this second index - #12 (for reference, USA is #17 and the UK is #11) and this is after the Sponsorship scandal broke.

Re:How do we protest?

[Anonymous Coward]

uh why not?

I voted Conservative, but it's fairly obvious the NDP are propping up the Liberals so they can extract as much as possible from them. They'd be a decently good bet if you wanted to get something out of the Liberals because they actually have leverage.

of course, that's making the mistake that the ideology of the NDP is actually power to the people. That's the line, but it isn't actually reality. They're more into power to the labour movement and power to the "good" special interests.

Re:How do we protest?

[qualico]

lol, "Resistance is futile.."

Re:How do we protest?

[qualico]

holy crap... ...screw the rankings, this isn't a contest.

Corruption sucks ass and its time to start talking about changing our system.
Time for a new constitution while were at it.
All we have here is a pile of useless amendments to a hoplessly outdated BNA, (British North American Act).

I "sigh" when people always look at how much worse it could be instead of how much better.

Re:How do we protest?

[roju]

In addition to writing your MP (which is a good start), you could get some signatures for the d-c.ca petition and send 'em to your MP with a nice letter asking him to present them to parliament. Maybe mention that many of his constituents (read: votes) feel strongly about the issue.

The problem with copyrights is that unlike health care etc, most people just don't care. The content owners are the only people who make a big fuss about it, and so they get their extensions. The few nerds who do care lack the clout to get their viewpoint heard and are just ignored. I find it really frustrating.

Your getting what you deserve.

[Joules Burn]

So the pushers are raising the bar for the video junkies again, now there's a surprise! You could just quit! Oh wait! It's neccessary to survival isn't it? Sorry I forgot. Yes, It's sarchasm.

Re:Your getting what you deserve.

[Quiet_Desperation]

"Yes, It's sarchasm."

Main Entry: sar-chasm
Function: noun
Etymology: Canadian, mainly the Second City cuicuit
Definition: A state of being where someone has used so much sarcasm for such an extended period of time, they can now only talk in a sarcastic mode. Ex: "I've fallen into a sarchasm, and I can't get up!"
Plural: sarchasii
Related words: sar-cough-agus

Re:Your getting what you deserve.

[Joules Burn]

"Once you go into the sarchasm, you never come out." I have a Condo on Umissedmypoint Street. Just across from the Old WordNazis Home.

How is AdScam going up north?

[random coward]

Is this a bone being thrown by the liberal party to try to stay in power through the massive AdScam corruption coming to light in Canada? Are they going to get support and money from the recording/movie industries to stay in power through all this in return for the legistlation?

Re:How is AdScam going up north?

[Chordonblue]

Of course you're not allowed to KNOW how AdScam is going. All proceedings are closed while they figure out how they're going to get out of this one.

Say what you want about the American court system but that situation's just bullshit!

Re:How is AdScam going up north?

[PedroReish]

Of course you're not allowed to KNOW how AdScam is going.

How can you not know how it's going? We are swimming in a sea of AdScam info in Canada.

All proceedings are closed while they figure out how they're going to get out of this one.

The proceedings are not closed. They've just finished hearing all the witnesses. They even extended the witness period so they could re-hear some people. Now judge Gomery has to write his report and that will take him to around november. All this is not a ploy from the liberals to stay in power or some other conspiracy, the commission is following it's own timeline.
Maybe you are talking about the publication ban that was in effect for some days (one or two months ago). That was bizarre for sure. But the ban has been repealed and everything is public again.

Say what you want about the American court system but that situation's just bullshit!

That's where you are wrong. This has nothing to do with the judicial system. It is NOT a trial. Nobody will get thrown in jail by judge Gomery. Although trials about AdScam have started parallel to the commission. Paul Coffin (involved in AdScam) has pleaded guilty on counts of frauds of up to 1.7 million dollars. He is awaiting his sentencing. That is the judicial system at work, it's not the AdScam Commission's job.

Re:How is AdScam going up north?

[Anonymous Coward]

The first rule of AdScam is you do NOT talk about AdScam.

The second rule of AdScam is...

You get the point.

Re:Intergalactic copyright battle

[ConsumedByTV]

Good timing, Deltron was just shuffling on.

It's only funny becuase it's true.

Big fat hairy deal

[Bullfish]

The CRIA and RIAA are suffering from the same flawed thinking, that is:

(1) Coerce/buy anti-copying/downloading/sharing rules from the government
(2) Consumers will be forced to buy your product
(3) Profit!

Well, as DCMA and lawsuits hasn't stopped filesharing in the US, I suspect that any provisions trying to stop it in Canada will have about the same effect. Better and new anonymous methods of downloading will come, and on and on it will go. However, even if they did succeed in stopping sharing etc, the result would more likely be:

(1) Tougher laws brought in
(2) Public apathy towards the industry products continues including lack of sales, save the odd star wars type blockbuster (music will always exist, but the days of the mega-star is over)
(3) Continued financial decline and disinterest!

The media industries will cry foul over the latest downloading tactic etc, while the public at large continues to not care.

If you think about it, outside of forums like these, the general public hasn't cared about these issues since the napster days. I don't see that changing.

Re:the laws need reform

[Anonymous Coward]

Intimidation of a kid... how mature and respectable.

Someone preaching about living by the rules of society should realize that grabbing a kid by the shirt and screaming at him, is likely frowned upon these days...

I hate to break it to you, but maybe the record store isn't doing well because of the type of music, not just piracy.

Correct me if i'm wrong (waits for the flood of responses) but the biggest selling music is the 12-18 Teen-pop crap not Christ-rock.

Also, could be just bad PR...word of mouth perhaps? "Hey, the owner of that store if nuts, he grabbed me and screamed at me. Don't ever shop there"

You can blame pirates for your stores downfall, maybe it's just poor business choices?

Not all that bad

[jscharla]

Although the new legislation will prevent circumventing digital locks, it still allows copying for personal use. Personally, I don't see this as a big deal. The digital lock thing I can completely understand - as long as they don't take away my rights to use what's mine everything seems to be good.

Re:Not all that bad

[TheGavster]

Seeings as to exercise your right to make a copy for personal use, you usually have to defeat some half-hearted digital lock (though the actual level of protection is more akin to packing twine). Sure you've got fair use rights, but the recording industry can make you have to break other laws to exercise them.

Re:Not all that bad

[parodyca]

Although the new legislation will prevent circumventing digital locks, it still allows copying for personal use. Personally, I don't see this as a big deal. The digital lock thing I can completely understand - as long as they don't take away my rights to use what's mine everything seems to be good.

Ah, but they do take away your rights to use what is yours. No more watching YOUR DVDs under linux. No more cracking your YOUR windows video games (or any other windows software) so they will run under linux. No more watching YOUR non-region 1 videos on your hacked DVD player.

Want to do a review of the latest hot DVD and place clips on your website? Forget it!

There could be software compatibility issues with M$ and others using TPMs to keep the competition from interoperating with their software. a'la StorageTek.

The list goes on, but I think you get the general idea here.

Re:Not all that bad

[markild]

Over here in Norway we just had the same discussion. The only problem here was that the proposal said that you could not convert a cd into any digital form for use in a mp3-player, cause you couldn't expect the cd to fit into the player (physicly that is!).

What happened was that someone, miracously, informed the people in charged that it actually was possible to convert it into the data used on the player. Now we suddenly have a law giving us the right to bypass any protection on the cd, and convert it into any digial format.

I think that if someone actually told the people in charge what their propsals would actually mean, half of them would get canned at the blink of an eye!

Re:Not all that bad

[v13inc]

But what happens when you want to copy a CD that is behind a digital lock (AKA copy protection)? This is circumventing our right to copy CDs. If all CDs had copy protection then our right to rip CDs wouldn't matter as we couldn't legally do it.

My MP ignored this so far since March 25

[saskboy]

Please write your MP to stop this bad new law.

DMCA for Canada

Please write your MP on this matter. Use my letter below if you don't want to write your own.
Send your letter for free (no postage necessary when parliament is in session), to your MP at the following address:
[your MP's name] M.P.
House of Commons
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

Find their email address, but write by paper mail too. http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/people/hou se/PostalCode.asp?lang=E

Dear Mr. Breitkreuz
To summarize the issues in this letter:
1. Internet Service Providers should not be required to keep extensive logs of private and legal online communications.

2. The government must not stop Canadian citizens from making personal-use copies of their legally purchased software, music, and movie media.

Background:
http://pch.gc.ca/progs/ac-ca/progs/pda-cpb/reform/ statement_e.cfm

Here is the reasoning:
The purpose of the Copyright Act is to support creativity and innovation in the arts and culture. To design a new Act on the failed and draconian Digital Millenium Copyright Act of the United States of America, would be a disaster for Canadian culture, and innovation. Also our court system could become clogged with law abiding citizens who make personal use copies of their music, software, and movie collections for no personal financial gain. An implementation of the proposed changes to the Copyright Act would unleash another "Gun Registry boondoggle" onto the Canadian people - creating criminals out of law abiding citizens at the expense of Canadian taxpayers.

Internet Service Providers like Sasktel should not be made to keep extensive client usage logs for possible future prosecution by various copyright-based industries. I don't want to pay for that system to be put into effect, and I don't think most people do. The phone companies are not forced by the government to record the content of phone conversations, only police can do that with a proper warrant. ISP logs are going to be equivalent to phone-taps, and that's a violation of my privacy. It's doing the job of the police, and is for the sole benefit of an industry basing its profits on an outdated business model that is no longer realistic for the Canadian government to protect.
It is completely unfair to be paying a levy to artists organizations for purchasing blank CD media to make home-use private copies of legal CD music, and now to also be unable to legally copy the music I've paid for off of Digital Rights Managed CDs. If copying CD music is going to be illegal, why is the government collecting money from the product for an illegal activity? I'm satisfied that the current levy is helping to compensate artists from illegitimate copying, and no new law is required to prevent me and other people from making sensible backups of our legal music, software, and movie collections.

Your representation in the House of Commons on this matter is greatly appreciated by me, and other supporters of personal liberty and innovation in the arts. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
my name

Re:My MP ignored this so far since March 25

[madox]

Thank you for this! The last time this type of thing came up, I mailed in this letter to my MP. (I think it was this one - did you post it before?) Looks like I have to do it again. Though I think my MP is too riled up fighting gay marriage to give a shit :/ sigh

Re:My MP ignored this so far since March 25

[saskboy]

Yes I've posted it before. I've only emailed my MP, but it looks like I'll have to write or phone, as he's ignored it for more than two months even though I requested a reply. I guess he too was too busy fighting against equal rights for homosexuals.

Re:My MP ignored this so far since March 25

[issachar]

I guess he too was too busy fighting against equal rights for homosexuals

Now this is something I really don't get. Why some people honestly seem to believe that the whole thing is a question of equal rights. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to start a thread on the rights or wrongs of gay marriage, I'm merely questioning the way in which the terms of debate have been cast.

Frankly, I don't see it as a question of equal rights because the right to marry someone under current law is not based on sexual orientation, but on gender.

For instance, fighting a law that says "black people can't vote in federal elections" is an equal rights thing because there's a clear parallel. A white man has a right to vote in federal elections and a black person does not.

By contrast we do not have any law that says "gays can't marry their partners". What we have is a law that says that all people of the age of majority can marry a person of the opposite sex as long as they are not related or a minor, or already married.

The sexual orientation of a person is not part of the law. I'm heterosexual, and it is against the law for me to marry another man. A gay man has the right to marry a woman. Of course what the gay man wants is the right to marry his male partner, but that doesn't make it an issue of equal rights.

I think the mistake is in thinking of the law in terms of if you're heterosexual, you can marry who you want to. But that isn't what the law is.

Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but it irritates me when people try to phrase everything as a "rights" issue. Some things are just laws we want to have passed. Just because it's not a "right", doesn't it mean it shouldn't be legal.

Re:My MP ignored this so far since March 25

[issachar]

must... preview... tags....

Re:My MP ignored this so far since March 25

[Anonymous Coward]

Frankly, I don't see it as a question of equal rights because the right to marry someone under current law is not based on sexual orientation, but on gender.

So by your logic it's OK to have a law banning interracial marriage. After all, a person is free to marry a person of his or her own race.

Re:My MP ignored this so far since March 25

[issachar]

See, now this is irritating. READ MY COMMENT !!!

At no point in my post was I arguing the merits of gay marriage, merely addressing the terms the debate had been cast in.

No I do NOT think the anti-miscegenation were acceptable. They were NOT an equal rights issue, because white people were banned from marrying outside their race as much as black people. Recognizing this fact, does not in ANY way suggest that anti-miscegenation laws are okay.

GAH!!

Re:the laws need reform

[Anonymous Coward]

Reality check!

1. Need does not beget entitlement.
2. Neither you nor the record companies have any moral right to force your way between the music and the people. You are selling a service - distribution - and your complaint is essentially that you want a legally enforced opportunity to charge people your price for a service they can get much cheaper in a free market.
3. One necessary thing the recording labels do is promotion. However, if they didn't exist then it would be a lot easier for independents to get airplay simply because all would be inpedendent. Oh no, not a genuinely free market!

I've been thinking about the dynamics of music distribution. Most tours make a loss; they are subsidised by the record companies to promote the bands' latest albums. In the absence of record companies, who would organise and promote band tours? One credible possibility is radio stations. Tickets as prizes already happens. Like any other variety of sponsorship, the sponsor profits by reflected glory, and it is cost-effective for radio stations to promote upcoming performances for their localities. It also strikes me that radio stations have studios...

As to the revenue model of a record-company-free industry, it seems to me that the simplest thing to do is encourage the sharing of mediocre quality MP3s and make high quality CD recordings available for online purchase from the band's website, CD arriving by snailmail. This suits the medium very well; the heavy compression necessary for online delivery degrades recording until it cannot compete with a hi-fi recording on CD - never underestimate the bandwidth of a Fedex full of CDs.

Some people will no doubt settle for mediocre recordings rather than pay. This is true but irrelevant: most artists are lucky to see $1 for every CD sold. Most of the loot goes to supply-chain middlemen such as record store owners and record companies. If sales drop by 90% and artists make $5 a CD from online sales then from the artist's point of view profits are up 500%.

Of course the record companies and record store owners won't be too thrilled, but they do not have a right to govern the relationship between a musician and his audience. They are not entitled to my money.

Fair Use Alive and Well

[webzombie]

Fair use is alive and well in Canada.

I pay for the RIGHT to copy what ever the fuck I want on to whatever media I've been taxed on.

That IS my RIGHT and I could give a shit how many hairs they split. Sharing MY music with my GLOBAL friends is NO different then sahring with my friends down the street. The fact that they claim a physical product must change hands to be considered legitimate sharing is just splitting legal hairs. IMFO

And according to these same laws, every school in Canada should be charged under the same act they want to charge file sharers with whenever they play "records" at their school dances! Oh yeah... get your check books out kids! No more sock hops! Fuckin' idiots!

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy_gd _protect-e.html#6

Examples of infringement

Infringement:

- reprinting an article without the copyright owner's permission;

- playing records at a dance without the copyright owners' permission;

- giving a public performance of a play without permission;

- photocopying articles for a class of students without permission; and

- taping your favourite band at a music concert without permission.

Not infringement:

- quoting a few lines of the article in a research paper (fair dealing);

- playing records at home;

- giving a public performance of a play by Shakespeare (no copyright exists/public domain);

- obtaining permission from the author and paying a fee to him or her (if requested) in order to use an article; and

- borrowing a musical tape from a friend to copy onto a blank tape for private use (a royalty payment to the owner of the song rights has been paid when the blank tape was purchased).

So FUCK THEM and my Karma! It shows how far behind these folks are... they still refer to music on tapes!

Re:Fair Use Alive and Well

[Anonymous Coward]

For the dances you can pay a socan fee and it's all legit. The fees arn't all that expensive for most things.

Re:Fair Use Alive and Well

[blanalex]

It is legal to make a copy to a blank disc (or put it on a MP3 player that you paid the levy), but if you download a song and simply keep it on your hard disc, you did not pay the levy, thus you didn't pay the song's rights.

Re:Fair Use Alive and Well

[CrimsonAvenger]

I pay for the RIGHT to copy what ever the fuck I want on to whatever media I've been taxed on.

Anything you pay for is not a "right", it's a privilege.

That said, was that last section in boldface (copying your friend's tape) part of your current Copyright Law?

Re:Fair Use Alive and Well

[djmurdoch]

That said, was that last section in boldface (copying your friend's tape) part of your current Copyright Law? Yes, it is. From the Copyright Act:
80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of
(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or
(c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.

Re:Fair Use Alive and Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm... they DO pay every time they have a school dance. Read up on SOCAN.

Re:Fair Use Alive and Well

[CrimsonAvenger]

Thank you!

Very nice Fair Use you have up there. I trust you'll get to keep it after your government gets through reading this new bill a time or two.

Re:Fair Use Alive and Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Use your right and write to your local MP about this. Ranting on Slashdot gets you nowhere.

More like Hitler...

[Chordonblue]

Hitler operated the same exact way - asking for one thing and then demanding another when that was granted.

You know the music industry up there shouldn't be able to have things both ways. If they want to put a stop to legal file sharing then those micropayments for every CD-R and CD-writer should be eliminated also. Like the U.S., Canada has built their own copywrite prison and it will take a major legislative act to right things again.

Re:More like Hitler...

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever modded this as flamebait must have a personal problem with the mention of Hilter because Chordonblue is spot-on with his/her history.

The countries against Hitler practiced "appeasement". Specifically, the Nazis and their infiltration into the Sudentenland argued that the German living in the area were being oppressed by the government of Czechloslovakia. As appeasement, everyone agreed to hand over the area to the Reich in order to prevent war.

Of course this was just a stepping stone.

Re:More like Hitler...

[Anonymous Coward]

Canada has built their own copywrite prison

"Canada has built its", "copyright".

Re:More like Hitler...

[Anonymous Coward]

Any good negotiator operates one of two ways

1) Asks for a ton then negotiates down, appearing to walk away with less than they had hoped to achieve when in reality they may have achieved more OR

2) asks for seemingly insignificant concession one at a time slowly inching toward their ultimate goal.

Hitler along with billions, if not trillions throughout history, was the second, which is funny because it is the more passive of the two approaches and generally used by non hostile parties. So, using the same logic you used to compare Hilter to the RIAA, it's safe to conclude that Hilter and the RIAA are pasivists... Right? How's that for flamebait?

By the way - I'll take the "Canadian prison" over the US one any day - my legally modded xbox does a great job of playing my legally copied CDs. That said I STILL spend several hundred dollars on CDs every year so the law makers in Canada must be doing something right.

Re:More like Hitler...

[Anonymous Coward]

I see we could work Godwin into this thread quickly!

Cheers!

A time for civil disobedience?

[It doesn't come easy]

IMHO, by being so draconian about it the copyright holders will bring about the very thing they are so afraid of (unfettered digital copying).

Get with the times

[ylikone]

Music is going digital and can be easily copied whether record shop owners like you fight it or not. Rather than whining and moaning, change your business strategy... start an MP3 shop or something. Change with the times or die.

Why not push it all the way?

[crovira]

The **AAs own Everything, Everywhere for all Eternity.(*) Regardless of the creation date! From this day forward, they own EVERYTHING.(**)

They should be happy with that.

*)But they can't act on any if it.
**) Now you know who to call when something's broken. (They get Spammers through copyright violation. Its THEIR 'Niagra' name and THEY can't use it.)

What exactly is it?

[RoadkillBunny]

I've read the article and there is only one point that I see: illegal to dreak digital locks. It will stay legal to copy CD's for personal use. How come the article mentions nothing about P2P?

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[rikkards]

Damn! Mine is Marlene Caterall (Liberal and Martin's lapdog). A hopeless git. Next election I will be voting for anyone other than her anyways. Probably will write something just because.

Not screwed yet.

[failure-man]

Correct me if I'm wrong but "Tabled" != "Implimented". What are the chances of this actually getting passed? Didn't something similar get shot down rather recently?

RTFA, people

[KillerBob]

RTFA. It's a *bill*, not a *law*. It's nowhere near passing, it's being introduced to parliament for debate.

Writing to your MP is a good thing at this point. But let me explain something about Canadian politics: just because a bill gets introduced to parliament does not mean that it actually passes into law. More than that, Parliament breaks up for the summer and any bills that are still on the dock at breakup usually end up getting forgotten for a while when Parliament returns to session and has to deal with important stuff again. On more than one occasion in the past, bills have been forgotten completely and never revisited after the summer break.

No, I'm not worried. I'm interested in the outcome because I run a website which has been the target of CRIA's advances before, but even if they're ever able to launch a lawsuit, there's absolutely no way they'd win the way the laws currently stand. Even under the US laws they wouldn't win....

Re:RTFA, people

[Chirs]

Yep...however this bill has been in the making for a couple years now. The CRIA is pushing for it, it's part of WIPO ratification, etc.

I doubt they're going to forget about it over the summer.

Re:RTFA, people

[despisethesun]

Just FYI KillerBob, I heard the Liberals were planning on keeping Parliament in session for longer than usual to ensure the gay marriage bill goes through. That means there's a serious risk that they'll have enough time to push this through. Hopefully there will be enough dissent that their minority gov't won't be able to pass it. That's why we need to speak up now.

Relax - It won't pass

[Anonymous Coward]

The odds aren't good of any bill making it into law if this late in a parliamentary cycle. If the government survives the summer (looking more likely than it did) then we've been promised an election 30 days after the Gomery enquiry reports, an event expected in late fall.

When the writ is dropped and the house dissolves for an election, all bills die on the order paper.

It's not particularly likely that a new bill--particularly a contentious new bill--will make it through thrid reading in the house and through the senate before that time.

My only complaint

[Mithrandir86]

From the article: "The new legislation will contain rules that will make it illegal to hack or break into the digital locks often used to prevent the copying of movies and software -- although it will remain perfectly legal in Canada to copy a CD for personal use."

That's the most offensive portion.

If they're going to make it illegal to share files, they have to repeal those blank media taxes.

Re:My only complaint

[Chirs]

You'll still be allowed to back up the encrypted files for personal use. You just won't be allowed to *decrypt* them with unauthorized tools.

--copying DVD files to Linux machine will be OK
--playing back on windows machine with PowerDVD will be OK

--playing back on Linux machine with open-source software will be illegal

Re:the laws need reform

[meringuoid]

I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of..... Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer CDs. Why is no one buying CDs?

Can't imagine, mate. No death metal, no cop-killer rap, lots of Christian music - why, yours should be the most popular record store in town!

Typical inflammatory response

[kypper]

Mod parent -1 Flamebait.
The US got quite a few of its brighter people back when Carter forgave the many who draft-dodged to Canada.

It's not "crying and running away" to leave a country where 52% of the country voted for someone who stands against the environment, social change and encouraging peaceful, FAIR trade. The only crying anyone does is when their house is ransacked by the FBI without a warrant and family members are trucked to Guantanamo Bay to rot without a fair trial.

When the majority of your country has fundamental belief differences, don't you believe it's time to move onto a place where you are accepted, respected and supported? Do you stay in a family that constantly berates and abuses you? I suppose... if you're an idiot.

It takes far more conviction to choose your morals and your beliefs over your country. Blind patriotism to a country that holds all of your values in opposition is the saddest form of ignorance a person can possess

Re:Typical inflammatory response

[MyLongNickName]

Blind patriotism to a country that holds all of your values in opposition is the saddest form of ignorance a person can possess

1) I doubt this is true. Does the US really hold values entirely in opposition to yours?

2) Abolitionists risked their lives for their beliefs in a country founded on slavery. You call them "idiots" and "the saddest ignorants". I call them heroes.

Re:Typical inflammatory response

[kypper]

Abolitionists were not facing corporate rule with the depths of FBI/CIA monitoring that goes on right now. Why don't you try to start a civil war over all of the attempts to curb your rights and freedoms. See how far you get. We'll just get nice snapshots of you in a dark prison cell with welts - if you get lucky.

The majority (52%) of the US holds enough values in opposition to mine that I have completely changed my path in order to keep from living there.

Re:Typical inflammatory response

[10101001 10101001]

If you were truly fighting a civil war, you'd almost certainly be dead before they arrest you. You keep saying that the majority (52%) of the US holds enough values in opposition to yours. How do you know this? Last I knew only around 51% of the population voted in the last election cycle. It's the fact that 49% of the population either has the apathy to not vote or the presumption that their candidate will win or lose without their vote mattering that is the base for which you should be going to.

I think it's a bad assumption to think that 52% of the US holds values opposite to you when the reality is that majority think both parties are so corrupt or so rigged that their vote no longer matters. It might seem stupid to try to raise an out of those who see futility and have cynical apathy, but as you say the corporate rule of the US perhaps has a lot to do with it as it seems to effect you as well. The real issue is to prove to people just how bad things really are such that they are finally willing to raise up arms and stop a corrupt government; ie, they're willing to die for the cause. It's very sad that those who were drafted did not do such, since the draft was clearly a violation of the 13th amendment, which is founded on the fact that everyone has a right to live. Government inaction can legally kill you, but government action cannot.

CRIA

[Anonymous Coward]

Canadian Recording Industy of America?

Re:CRIA

[Moulinneuf]

http://www.cria.ca/

Canadian Recording Industry Association

Where are America :

C ourageous
A mericans
N oble
A mericans
D efender of
A mericas

Where not "of" , where it ...

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[markild]

And what would you write?

Dear Mr. Big-Politics-Guy
I really like getting stuff for free. Can we please keep doing that?

Ignore it.

[Colin Smith]

It works for Italians.

Re:the laws need reform

[Maxo-Texas]

Well the first problem is that I think your entire story is a big fat made up lie.

But granting that this --really-- happened.

You face a lot bigger problems than p2p. Walmart sells the same CD's that you do at a fraction of the cost and your big buddies give walmart a better price break than they do you. The price walmart charges for CD's is below the price you PAY wholesale for your CD's.

Then there is amazon and other similar services. I buy most of my dvd's and crap like that online now. The product is delivered to my door and it is STILL cheaper than buying it in your store.

But there's more. 12 years ago, there were maybe 40 tv stations, no real dvd's to watch, a lot less videogames, etc. I listened to music a couple hours a week more then than I do now.

But there's still more. The music they put out these days is generic crap. It all sounds the same- most of the artists can't sing their own material in concert- and it doesn't have anything to say. I listen to new songs a couple times on the radio and have no interest in purchasingthem.

But there's still more. The price of CD's is SO expensive compared to the physical cost to make them that it just pisses me off and I wouldn't buy a new CD even if I DID like the music. I'll record it off the radio, buy a used cd, buy it off "Allofmp3.com", etc.

CD sales and profits are UP. WAY UP. So while your poor mythical store is suffering someone is selling a hell of a lot of CD's somewhere.

Next time you might also add how you are supporting your old feeble grandmother and a young child. That's what politicians always do when they want to pass another onerous law.

I dont think so..

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried ignoring a mugger the other night. After beating me over the head with a gavel and raping me, he then stole my wallet and passed a law to raise my taxes.

Ignoring them doesn't work.

Around 25%

[Hamfist]

Around 25% (7 million of 30 million) Canadians regularly use file sharing networks. I don't think this legislation will pass 3 readings. There's a minority government in charge right now, and it wouldn't take much to knock them out if this bill fails. I'm quite surprised that they're even willing to take a chance on this one at this point in time. During Chretien's time, there'd be no problem. Now it's a little bit tougher.

Re:Around 25%

[jsrlepage]

I am so very sorry to counter-argument your great theory, but alas, even though the LIBERALS are the minority, the conservative party is no less partial towards the companies. Remember, Harper and his crew are Conservative, therefore closer to republicans than anything.

Re:Around 25%

[MightyMartian]

Well, the Conservatives are crashing in the polls right now, so politically speaking, the Liberals with their NDP partners ought to be able to swim for a while yet. But you're right, and that the companies have probably bought both parties, and as the average NDP member probably doesn't care about digital rights, I'd say this legislation is as good as passed.

Call your MP today. Don't just write. Call.

[Bahumat]

Put a voice to the words.

Use http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/people/hou se/PostalCode.asp?lang=E&source=sm/this link to look up your MP by postal code, and then phone them.

Be polite, be courteous, but be firm. State, be it via voice mail or directly, that you are in opposition to the upcoming copyright legislation, and hope that your MP will vote in opposition to it.

(Whatever you do, don't state that "Although I didn't vote for your party...").

Indicate to them whether or not this is an issue your future vote will hinge on; that will get their attention, guaranteed.

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Mr. Big-Politics-Guy,

I'm not getting stuff for free. I pay for my music every time I buy a blank CD, even if I don't use that CD to hold music. I also pay on a whole bunch of other media storage formats. Even though I've paid, the CRIA keeps yelling that I'm stealing! Please make them stop. Also, send me a kitten.

Can't have it both ways...

[DarthVain]

Interesting articles. The one thing that I found to be the most intersting is how this is going to work with the legislated media tax that is already in place.

When it first came out I thought it was wrong, but the government caved to pressure (presumably from the recording industry). Basically if you by CD-R's or writable DVD's you pay a 'media tax' on top of the purchace price (it is included in the price you see, they used to break it down for the consumer). However this is a very stupid tax as the limits are retaded (tax size is based up media storage capacity!), as this also includes things like ipods, and the like. Are CD players, nope. Is general memory, nope. But if a device is basically a big memory stick or HD that plays music, it is taxed. The real evil part of this tax is that it ASSUMES that everyone is a Buccaneer (Yar!). You could buy CD-R's for nothing more than stright data, yet you would be paying a media tax as they assume that they will be used to copy music or something. I am not sure about USB drives, but it would not surprise me if they are taxed as well. Very evil stuff considering out legal system and the whole innocent before proven guilty etc...

In a slightly unrealted note, this errosion has been happing in Canada for sometime now, under the guise or reasoning that the courts cannot handle the volume. Or that it is too expensive to try every case. An example of this is giving the powers to cities to write parking tickets, which most use maninly as a revune stream (not its intention I don't think). I got a parking ticket in Ottawa about a year ago (not where I live). The short version of the story is: I was never issued a ticket! I get a letter in the mail, saying I owe 40$ for parking tickets. I call the city and try to explain to the the issue, they do not care. Their response is that if I had a problem with it I COULD fight it in court. However, I would have to drive 250km on a work day in the middle of the week at least once, at the cost of at least 400$. Or I could pay the ticket. They warn me if I do not I will not be able to register my car when it comes up. So I can pay 400$ and fight it, or just pay the (and therefore pleading guilty of the offence) ticket of 40$. I paid the ticket, even though it was wrong. Most definitions I read would say this is stright up extortion, but whatever. Just thinking about this whole affair again boils my balls. Anyway enough of this rant. Back to regular programming.

Civil liberities aside what is really interesting is the recording industry cannot have it both ways. If legislation is passed making downloading and copying music illegal, then they cannot justify having a "media tax" anymore as I see it. You cannot tax an illegal activity (as that legitimizes it). Thats like making the crack dealer, pay tax (or even more funny in Canada, making his crackheads pay GST on their spank). Why not just tax murder while your at it, 10$ a head I say! However once a tax is in place it is VERY hard to get rid of it (GST anyone!), I bet you anything they will what to have both worlds.

Another of my favorite examples of this lunacy is I once heard a story about a Canadian that got caught selling cocain in Vietnam. The government there, sentanced her to death by firing squad, AND fined her 100,000$. The big joke eveyone was saying was "if I were her, I wouldn't pay the fine". The only differenace here is in Canada, IF they keep both the tax and pass the coyright bill it will be like eveytime you buy media, they convict you, and fine you, and if someday that ACTUALLY catch you doing it, they will try to convict you and fine and/or jail you. So in esasnce its like Canadians paying a mandatory tax on cocain, then if they are caught, fined. So in this case you cannot help but pay.

Anyway my rant is now very long and makes little sense even to me anymore. I am not sure why I picked all the drug referances, only that they are illegal.

Anyway thats my 2 cents (or twenty bucks as the case may be)

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[kwandar]

If I had points, I'd mod you up insightful!!

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[Random Destruction]

"Thats like making the crack dealer, pay tax " we talked about that in law class. supposedly there is a way to pay income tax on things like drug deals. Im not sure of the specifics, but my teacher said they basically have a "dont ask, dont tell" clause if you want to declare more. And im sure the RCMP wouldn't bother to check up on you :)

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[cyberguard2k]

If you pay the tax when you buy the media, you are assumed guilty. Thus you are already sentence for the crime of copyright.

If they then find you on a p2p network and try to sue you, could you plead double-jeopardy (or something like that). It's a law (look I'm no lawyer but I know it exist) that prevent a person to be sentenced twice for the same crime...

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want an example of how hard it is to get rid of a tax, why not use income tax?

I mean, it's only been around nearly 90 years after it was supposed to have been abolished.

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[SerialEx13]

Your information about the levies is incorrect. They were removed from devices such as the iPod and recordable DVDs never had such a levy to being with.

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[DarthVain]

Would be news to me... I know at one point they used to show it... so 300$ ipod and 30$ media tax or whatever... NOw I don't see it anymore. That says to me either they don't show it anymore, or like you said they don't do it anymore.

However, that isn't really the point, if you RTFA you would see that they (industry) still has about 250 MILLION of those tax dollars in a bank account. You can bet they ain't gonna give it back (even if they could possibly figure out how).

Another good analogy is smokes in Canada. For years the Canadian gouvernment has taxed the bejesus out of poor smokers, basically because they can. They use them as a revenue stream. If tomorow they suddenly decided "Hey you know what smoking is really fucking bad, they should be illegal"... This won't happen for several reasons, one is they would lose a boatload of money. They would also tick off voters. Third they would looke like really big idiots, as they basically have reversed their policy of many years exploiting people, and condoning an activity that NOW they admit should be illegal.

Believe it or not but gourvenments run on appreances and looking like a shit farmer isn't gonna sit well with most. So even by taxing media in the near past they have condoned the activity and made profits (for them or for industry), so to come out now and say, oopsie thats bad, illegal, go to jail, pay fine... well in short they will look like idiots, and dispite how the media paints them, political type people hate looking like idiots as it errodes their appreance and thus their power.

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[Anonymous Coward]

They do not check on the source of additional income. If Al Capone had done that he would never have gone to jail for tax evasion.

Re:Can't have it both ways...

[Alsee]

You cannot tax an illegal activity

I don't know about Canada, but many states in the US have specific tax systems on illegal drugs. I will cite Kansas below, simply because it was the first Google hit.

Kansas Department of Revenue:
The fact that dealing marijuana and controlled substances is illegal does not exempt it from taxation. Therefore drug dealers are required by law to purchase drug tax stamps.

The drug tax is due as soon as the dealer takes possession of the marijuana or controlled substance. Payment of the drug tax will purchase the drug tax stamps. Attach the stamp to the marijuana and/or controlled substance immediately after receiving the substance. The stamps are valid for 3 months. Drugs seized without stamps or having expired stamps may result in criminal or civil penalties which may include fines, seizure of property or liens against real estate.

A dealer is not required to give his/her name or address when purchasing stamps and the Department is prohibited from sharing any information relating to the purchase of drug tax stamps with law enforcement or anyone else.

Purchasing drug tax stamps does not make possession of drugs legal.

Kansas drug tax FAQ

Kansas drug tax rates:
Marijuana:
* Processed $3.50 per gram
* Wet Plant $0.40 per gram
* Dry Plant $0.90 per gram
Controlled substances:
* $200 per gram or portion of gram
Controlled substances:
* $2000 per 50 dose unit or portion of unit

There's even a eBay store dedicated to marihuana tax stamps from across the country.

-

Ugh, this is so frustrating...

[jcdick1]

It is so frustrating to me to see so many governments getting the intent of copyright and patent completely backwards. The power of these two concepts to drive innovation is in their *expiration* and not in their original issue. The idea behind these concpets is that if the creator wants to continue his nice exclusive income, he darn well better come up with something new and cool before the old income dries up.

Grrr...

Re:Ugh, this is so frustrating...

[stlhawkeye]

It is so frustrating to me to see so many governments getting the intent of copyright and patent completely backwards. The power of these two concepts to drive innovation is in their *expiration* and not in their original issue. The idea behind these concpets is that if the creator wants to continue his nice exclusive income, he darn well better come up with something new and cool before the old income dries up.

This isn't insightful at all, it's backwards. The way copyright and patent law encourages innovation is by protecting the ability of an inventor/innovator to profit by his ideas. This is especially important for small businesses or individuals without considerable wealth who cannot start up production. This is to protect intelligent people and their ideas from being exploited by large businesses. The expiration is patent law is not what drives innovation, it's the promise of having a grace period to make some money off of it. If inventing something would just result in some huge corporate cloning your idea and making a fortune off of it, nobody would do it. Patents protect the intellectual property of the inventor. The expiration clause is to protect capitalism and competition, not to encourage innovation.

Re:Ugh, this is so frustrating...

[Anonymous Coward]

The expiration clause is to protect capitalism and competition, not to encourage innovation.

It most certainly is not. It's blatant trade protectionism, period. That's about as socialist as you can get!

Capitalism says you need to compete on your own merits: if you make one kind of product, and I make a better version, than I should get the profits, not you. Copyright changes all that.

If you make the first version of a product, and then use a government monopoly to forbid me from making a better version until a full century has elapsed, then you're pretty damn anti-capitalist, aren't you?

And yes, copyright over lasts over a century in this country: if I live to be as old as my grandfather, the copyright on this post won't expire until 2107.

Sheesh. Get your terms straight. Doing something "for the good of the people" or "for the good of the economy" is straight up socialism. There are times when that's good; times when it's bad, but call a spade a spade.

Capitalism is based on free and equal competition in the marketplace; not government monopolies.
--
AC

Re:Ugh, this is so frustrating...

[Alsee]

This isn't insightful at all, it's backwards... intellectual property

You're half way there, but *you* are still including substantial backwards elements in your critique.

Copyrights and patents exist to promote progress - to promote contributions to the public domain and the expansion of the public domian, to promote the public benefit. They do so by granting the author/inventor a temprorary limited monopoly as an incentive to create and publish their creation.

All such rights initially lie with the public, and all works of authorship and all inventions are fundamentally public property (to the extent you can call information "property" at all). The public (collectively) willingly chooses to temproarily turn over some of their rights to the author/inventor, and the public willingly do so for their own collective benefit. The author/inventor only has those rights the public collectively chooses to grant him for their own benefit. It is not the information itself he owns. The copyright holder/inventor has no "intellectual property", what he owns is the legal copyright itself or the legal patent itself, and the right to enforce it for the duration the public has exclusively LOANED him those rights.

I realize this is a Canadian story, but I'm far more familiar with the US legal foundation of copyright and patents, so that is what I am about to cite.

Copyrights and patents both originate in article 1 section 8 clause 8 of the Constitution. This clause grants congress the power - if they choose to do so - to Promote Progress. It authorizes the method of creating copyrights and patents as a means of doing so if they wish. Congress if perfectly free not to exercize their power to Promote Progress, and they are perfectly free not to utilize the means of creating copyrights and patents. Prior to any act of congress all such rights remain in their nautral state with the public and the creator "owns" nothing. The Supreme Court explicitly rules that creators have no inherent rights, that they only have the rights explicitly granted to them by congress. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that congress cannot grant rights to creators for the purpose of benefits or profits for the creator, that any benefits or profits to the creator are merely a side effect, that such rights may only be granted for the purpose of the public benefit, that any rights granted for any purpose other than the public benefit are invalid illegal and unconstitutional. The rights that may be granted to the creator are also limited by other portions of the constitution, for example much of Fair Use was established on First Amendment grounds.

Fair Use: For example copyright law technically made all copying illegal, even the use of small excerpts for comment and criticism purposes. This denied the ability to effectively review or criticize works. This is an unconstitutional restriction of Free Speech. Thus was Fair Use was established, a restriction on copyright law itself. Copyright law does not grant or define Fair Use. Fair Use was establised and existed more than a hundred years before it ever appeared in the text of the law. It is Fair Use which constrains the rights congress may grant an author in the first place. Fair Use which limits copyright. Any attempt by congress to diminish or revoke Fair Use rights would be unconstititional, null and void.

-

Re:Ugh, this is so frustrating...

[roju]

In Free Culture, Lessig gives a background on the Statute of Anne, which was the first codification of modern copyright law. What is interesting is that at the time England already had copyright in the common law. The reason they codified it was to specifically add expiration to break the publishing monopolies, and hence encourage both creativity and capitalism. From a historical perspective, the GP is exactly right - the purpose of copyright law is to expire copyrights. Weird, eh?

Radio?

[RoadkillBunny]

How come radio is free to share music? How is downloading MP3's from internet any different? If the radio station pays royalities (I think they do) then I can pay royalities myself and start a P2P site. The revenue I generate from ads would go to the music companies and the users can download music for free! Would that be legal?

Re:Radio?

[bwcbwc]

In the US, radio stations pay royalties for the music they play. It's a structure similar to what the feds enacted for web radio stations a few years ago: a flat rate per song.

Of course the record companies pay a lot back to the media brokers and radio station in the typical "pay for play" scheme, so for many stations it's not an issue.

Re:Radio?

[Howlett]

Yes, that is exactly how it works. Radio stations pay royalties every time a song is played. But you cant just start a radio station (or a website) and start giving away music, and send a check to the music company. You have to have a contract with them.

Thats the difference. Music companies want people to hear their product on the radio, and don't want them to be able to download it. Its too easy for them to give it too all their friends.

The barriers to piracy are higher on the radio. Less people are willing to bother.

Yeah, I can keep my work for stock sales now

[Valleye]

It has always been non-level playing field for us photographers when competing with most of the rest of the world, including the States. We did not own commissioned work that we shoot. After this passes I can use my editorial outtakes for stock sales and improve my earning potential.

How much protection is enough for the **AA?

[Anaphiel]

Just a little bit more.

Nothing is good enough for the content industry

[Anita Coney]

If the music industry had its way, we'd have to pay every time we hear a song. E.g., on the radio, every time we hum a song, and every time we even think of a song to ourselves.

Heck, even DJs would be obligated to pay, as they shouldn't be allowed to hear the music for free.

And double heck, anyone listening to you humming would be obligated to pay too.

Why The CRIA Suddenly Wants More

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a simple reason why the CRIA wants even tougher language now - Graham Henderson.

When the CRIA first started pushing for copyright reform and DMCA-like provisions, Brian Robertson was at the helm. However, Brian left about a year ago, and Graham left his VP job at Universal to take over.

I've known Graham casually since his Universal days, and since he became head of the CRIA I've heard him speak a few times...and let me tell you, he's crazy. Graham's main points are usually:

- the CD is still the future of music
- digital music is not important at all
- Technology will be able to put the genie back into the bottle
- Legislation will put the genie back into the bottle

And my favourite Graham Henderson argument:

- People pay $3 for a ringtone because it's a closed technology and you can't pirate music on it. Therefore, we need to lock down all digital music, and charge at least $3 a song, since that's what the ringtone business tells us it's worth.

Now, anyone who knows anything about the (digital) music industry knows that every single one of those points is a complete load of crap. EVERY SINGLE ONE. He's delusional. But this is what he sticks to, because he really doesn't understand the business and where the industry is going.

Get rid of Graham and put someone with some understanding in there, and things will get more reasonable.

(identity withheld to protect the innoc...uhh, me.)

stereotype

[Master Ben]

"If a father or mother gets a notice from their ISP that they might be sued because of the activities of their teenaged son or daughter, you could be pretty well assured that that activity is going to change," said Jay Thomson of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers.

As if it's just kids that do it.

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Master Ben]

I really hope people already know who their MP is.

Re:the laws need reform

[Anonymous Coward]

Your mythical record store is suffering so badly because you are clearly a lousy businessman. A niche genre music store (ie Christian rock) is a hobby not a business. The "sick" stuff like Marilyn Manson and "cop killer" rap is what sells and what brings in the money, either for big profit or to keep a roof over your families head.

This story draws a clear analogy with the music industry. It refuses to evolve and adapt to inevitable change, trying to save itself with round-about methods instead of addressing the problems.

Personal as in...

[daviq]

"it will remain perfectly legal in Canada to copy a CD for personal use." This quote was found on the site reporting the basic rules of the new law, but doesn't stop people from copying cd's. Sure it says for "personal" use, but what is personal...?

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[davecb]

My letter to the Hon. Jim Peterson, ny MP:

Subject: Copying levy versus the proposed copyright bill

I'm writing again about proposed changes in copyright law,
strongly urged by our American neighbors and the record
publishing industry.

I was pleased to hear your opinion on the US-like
misuse of protection measures, and wonder if we're
going to follow our previous policy of using copying levies
instead of prohibitions on copying CDs we legally
own.

The record industry seems to confuse this with
indiscriminate file sharing, and is urging amendments
that would make innocent copiers as liable as persons
who illegally publish other's works on the internet.

I urge you to support our successful policy of
copying levies on CDs, DVDs and extend the
levies to removable disks ("pen drives") and other
iPod-like devices), instead of reducing the
consumer's right to copy their own property under
the copyright act.

--dave

Re:the laws need reform

[WoBIX]

Don't worry Ned, you can still pimp out Rod and Todd for profit. :)

This parents comment gets better every time it's reposted when there's any sort of RIAA story.

It's definitely not the first time this cut/paste job has found its way on to Slashdot.

And that differs from the rest of the world how?

[Lifewish]

I don't know of a single country on the face of the planet where people can say with a straight face that their government behaves with the honour and courage they would wish it to.

Partially, of course, cos if it did so it'd get ground under by bigger, more pragmatic neighbours.

Re:And that differs from the rest of the world how

[qualico]

So true.
There is always a rotten apple in the barrel.

Now if only we could make a rot resistant apple.

Text of the Current Law

[Anonymous Coward]

See this link for the full text of the current Canadian Copyright Act.

Note the religous bias of section 32.2(3), gives special rights to members of religious groups that aren't permitted to the general public: (emphasis mine...)

"(3) No religious organization or institution, educational institution and no charitable or fraternal organization shall be held liable to pay any compensation for doing any of the following acts in furtherance of a religious, educational or charitable object:"

Why should the "Church of Copyright Infringement" get to perform "sacraments" that the rest of the general public are denied? It doesn't make any sense!

Bear in mind also section 32.2(1)(d), which says you can only legally read a "reasonable section" of a book out loud. No poetry readings in the park allowed!

"d) for any person to read or recite in public a reasonable extract from a published work;"

I think our current system of copyright sucks; but read, and judge for yourself.
--
AC

Re:the laws need reform

[skarphace]

They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?

They fought the war on drugs with skill? Really? Let me take a hit off of my crack pipe and read that again...

Mod Parent Up!!

[lerxstz]

Interesting strategy! (I just burned up my mod points fighting trolls in the Dr. Who discussion. Damn.)

I'm thinking "bad plan".

[JudgeFurious]

Mexico? Isn't that a tad to far over towards the "complete anarchy" side of the problem? On this side of the border you'll get your door kicked in one day for downloading an mp3 which I understand is not so good but on that side of the border the police chief lasts all of one day. I'm in Texas too and I'm staying put.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/321 7908

Re:the laws need reform

[MightyMartian]

Have any of you guys at any part of the record business considered that you're selling crap. You know, I can pick any year from about 1925 onward and have damn fine music. Jazz, blues, classical, big band, and later swing and rock-and-roll, up into experimental rock, even some decent easy listening, grand hard rock, heavy metal, punk and new wave.

And then you guys started hawking hair metal bands, boy bands, crappy Christian rock (have you actually listend to that garbage), teeny-bopper singers who probably made more money with their K-mart clothing lines than on singles, and the final abuse of a second generation of boy bands and female "stars" so f**king bad that their thin voices had to be run through masses of digital processing (not to mention layers of backing vocals and build up the crap voice).

Jonie Mitchel was right when she said that record executives were always crooks, but at least they used to be crooks who liked music. CDs were priced beyond all reason, and the record companies reaped vast rewards from the vast supply of one-off crap artists who they didn't have to spend much time grooming and could drop as quick as could be for the next set of talentless beautiful people who had big t*ts or muscular physiques. As the late, great George Harrison said of the Spice Girls (and it applies to the likes of Brittney Spears), they were just as good with the sound turned off.

So you know what, the whole lot of you, from the small record stores to the big mega-giant record companies are reaping the rewards. Gazillions were made, artists were ripped off (look at Levon Helm, one of the greatest vocalists in rock history, suing Robbie Robertson and the Band's record company because the all conspired to screw everyone else in the Band, or Bo Diddley who recorded some of the best music ever put to vinyl). What the whole record industry deserves is to have its decades of abuse of consumers and artists put out in the open, and when it pays for its sins, then it can start talking about how it's been abused.

End a tax? In Canada? BWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[snarkasaurus]

Thank you anonymous one, I needed a good laugh. Obviously the media tax will continue, and indeed be increased from time to time. Obviously some copyright law will be passed further eroding the range of legal options open to Canadians. And obviously it will be roundly ignored by everyone in the country just like the gun registry and the satellite tv laws. You know its an offence up here to have a satellite dish unless you have Bell Expressvue or Rodger's Satelite? Think anybody ever gets charged with that?

So the Great White North slowly slides farther into the post-Christian Eurorelativist swamp, where every manner of theft and slease is accepted unless you piss off the cops.

Personally I plan to buy all my audio/video recording widgetry before whatever idiot law they pass comes into force and they stick it all full of spyware/DRM bullshit. Same idea as using obsolete operating systems. Windows 95 is crap, but at least it don't phone home to Bill.

Sample letter:

[visgoth]

Dear Asshole,

I'm tired of voting for people who are supposed to be my representative in the House of Commons, yet end up doing whatever the fuck they please.

Therefore, you will do as I say, or I will come by your house (which, in fact, is mine, as my taxes likely paid for a good portion of the bloody thing) and proceed to kick your dog, set fire to your mailbox, and generally dispense great misery unto you and yours.

Sincerely,

Someone who's tired of self serving, tow the party line, weenie politicians.

Re:Sample letter:

[gobbo]

Someone who's tired of self serving, tow the party line, weenie politicians.

Toe. Toe the party line. As in "Toe the line, you grunts!"

Someone who tows the party line is a leader, making changes.

The government won't last long enough to pass it

[canadianlinuxnerd]

For anyone following Canadian politics lately you'll already know the Government is unlikely to last long enough to pass this anyway, so I wouldn't worry to much.

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Anonymous Coward]

And what would you write?

Dear Mr. Big-Politics-Guy
I really like getting stuff for free. Can we please keep doing that?

How about:

"Dear Mr. Big-Politics-Guy

I really like getting to speak and act freely. Can we please keep doing that?"

I don't care about "free music". I wish all the file sharers would get caught, so we can focus on the real issue: free speech.

Copyright monopolies take away my right to create a related product, just because I didn't invent the first model. They stiffle innovation as much as they reward it, by preventing creators from building on previous knowledge and work. It's hard to make progress when you're forced to reinvent the wheel all the time.

Let's say I want to scan in a map of my neighhourhood, and cross reference it with the ads in the phone book, so that I can tell at a glance what's nearby. That's illegal, because it requires scanning in a copyrighted map, and copyrighted ads. Doing in manually is legal, because humans aren't considered copying devices, but computers are. So, copyright law is in the way here, as it is in many cases.

Did you ever buy a poster, but found it too big for the frame? Pause before you cut it to make it fit; that might infringe the moral rights of the author! The copyright act states that putting a picture in a new frame is explictly legal;but any more drastic changes to your own poster may be illegal! The Eaton's centre was sued for moving pieces of a mobile that were about to fall on it's customer's heads, because the artist didn't like how the safe version looked. Copyright means you don't have all the rights to the property you've bought outright.

Ever see a statue in bronze, and think it would look better in gold? Don't try to comission a better version; that would be illegal under copyright law! You need to get the copyright holder to permit you do make your own statues; after all, they made one, first.

Don't try to write down the plot to your dreams after watching late night TV; you see, someone owns the rights to talk about those characters. You don't get free speech rights to other people's ideas; you don't get re-cast anyone's previous works in new and interesting ways, because that kind of incremental innovation is illegal.

But don't worry: copyrights expire. In fact, my copyright to this message will probably expire in just under a century, if I live my grandfather's age. Then again, Canada is less than 150 years old as a country; so that's not saying much.

Some people want copyrights never to expire. I guess they want the guy who owns the circle to be able to forbid everyone else from building anything with wheels; and the guy who owns the square from preventing anyone from building anything like a building or a house.

Then again, some of these ideas fall under "Industrial Design" in Canada: but the distinction is nebulous at best.

If I make 20 ornate goblets, they're protected for 100 years under the Copyright Act. If I make another 40, the same 20 goblets suddenly fall under the Industrial Design act, and are only protected for 10 years. If it's the same "innovation", then why add 90 years of monopoly protection in the one case, but not in the other?

So, yes, some of us want copyrights to be restricted because of important reasons like freedom of speech and creative expression. I don't give a damn about free music; I don't download it, because it's illegal.

I do want to be able to create derivative works, and improve upon our designs at a rate much faster than one change every century. I don't think that's such an unfair thing to ask for.
--
AC

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Citizen of Earth]

click on Find your Member of Parliament using your Postal Code

In the Alphabetical listing page, they list some members of parliament as being "Honourable" (Hon.) and others as not. I didn't realize that they (a) drew a distinction nor that (b) there is such a distinction to be drawn.

Re:End a tax? In Canada? BWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[Rhipf]

Just to clarify a point for you. There was a resent court decision that now makes it legal to own a non-Canadian satelite system. In fact on a recent trip to Winnipeg I actually saw a sign on the roadside advertising DirecTV hookups.

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Medevo]

To the best of my Knowledge, the titles "Honourable" and "Right Honourable" are reserved for members of parliament.

"Honourable" simply means you have served as a MP before (so the people listed have been simply re-elected).

"Right Honourable" is reserved for the current and former Prime Ministers.

People who serve on Cabinet positions or who chair committee's have more say and power, but these things do not show up as a title.

Medevo

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[babble123]

Damn! Mine is Marlene Caterall (Liberal and Martin's lapdog). A hopeless git.

You misspelled "grit".

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Idarubicin]

In the Alphabetical listing page, they list some members of parliament as being "Honourable" (Hon.) and others as not. I didn't realize that they (a) drew a distinction nor that (b) there is such a distinction to be drawn.

For those who are wondering, the "Honourable" style comes with becoming a Privy Councillor, which in turn is bestowed on members of Cabinet (among others). In reality, members of Cabinet are often no more honourable than their backbench colleagues. :-)

Here's my letter to my MP

[wgadmin]

Dear Hon. MP:

I am deeply concerned about the copyright legislation your government intends to introduce. It's all over the Internet. I find it interesting that the international community is also discussing the consequences of this Canadian bill. Please see this link, for a thorough discussion:

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/09/12 3234&tid=123&tid=141&tid=97&tid=155

As far as most voting individuals are concerned, the entire entertainment industry (especially the movie and music divisions) is, pure and simple, an institution of greed. They grossly overestimate their total contribution to society. They especially overestimate the value of their products. And, what's worse, they gravely underestimate, and consequently insult, the intelligence of their consumers.

As such, I have absolutely no intention of increasing neither their economic subsidy nor political support. And I am not at all interested in seeing this legislation go forward. It's bad enough that every time my company purchases a package of blank CDs or DVDs, your government assumes I intent to use them to pirate movies and music, and I am subsequently taxed for this blanket misconception. Just maybe we are using this media to archive the one and only asset which keeps my company in business -- that is to say, DATA. Our data. Which has, to the astonishment of the entertainment industry, nothing to do with them.

In closing, I ask you this: if this legislation passes, will your government repeal the blank CD/DVD tax? I am betting that you will not.

Please, I ask you to consider defeating this legislation. There are so many more important problems which deserve your immediate and full attention. The entertainment industry, regardless of the size and wealth of its many powerful lobbies, simply shouldn't rank in comparison.

Thank you very much for your attention,
--

Re:End a tax? In Canada? BWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[antiMStroll]

Good point, this still ahs to make it through the courts.

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello Mr. Siksay,

I am writing you to discuss a great threat to freedom and culture in
our country today. There is legislation being put before the house next
week, see(
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew s/1118271756635_30/?hub=CTVNewsAt11 )
. legislation that if passed, would curtail the rights and freedoms we have
to disseminate culture in a not for profit way. What I am talking about is
File Sharing. File sharing promotes the free exchange of art - in its many
forms - and thus serves to enhance our culture. Art is not meant to be
locked up in a vault with only a privileged few being able to view it. Art
is made to contribute to the social fabric that weaves to and fro and which
binds our country together.

I _urge_ you to vote against this legislation - and any such
legislation to come down the pipe in the future. To not do so would be
furthering the erosion of our collective culture that copyright was put in
place to prevent! The media cartels have twisted the true meaning of
copyright into a creators rights issue. This was not the original intention
of copyright. This is not about protecting the creators rights, this is
about societal betterment. It was meant to encourage social development.

I fear that this poorly written email does not do the cause justice
so I have included several links to people who are more wordy than I. In
closing, I would like you to consider what it would be like to have
masterpieces, say all of Monet's flowers, or Beethoven's moonlight sonata,
owned by a corporation whom you would have to pay for the right to enjoy.
That my friend is where this legislation is meant to take us.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/ - Ottawa law professors comments
http://www.baen.com/chapters/W200011/0671319744___ 1.htm - A short story
that is on topic

Regards,
--Name Ommited--

Boycott

[StratoChief66]

We don't have to think of this in a bad way, they leave the right to make copies for your own use, plus that gives us good reason to repeal the tax on blanks.

Also I question what rights this give the CRIA, can they sue me when I download RIAA music? If they can only sue for their own music then I see an opening here.

But the most useful thing I see here is that if it does indeed pass then I will boycott the purchase (or download) of any Canadian music. I've already completed my Moxy Fruvous collection, what other Canadian music do I need?

In the case of US music I can't get away from it, most music is american but with the (relatively) small amount of music I like produced here in canada I am able and willing to say "I'd really like to buy your music, but your label has been repeatedly trying to fuck over your fans rights so I think I'm gonna pass."

Think of the handful of Canadian based musicians you like, just say screw you to them to make a point. Maybe the backlash will make them think twice about this move against those they are supposed to be entertaining.

Whaddya want to bet...

[Eskimore_]

Whaddya want to bet that they make it illegal AND continue to levy our blank media, with was intended to compensate for file sharing.

It's like a bribe that doesn't buy you anything. Fucking pussy government bending over for the lobby groups....

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[rikkards]

Tomato, tomatoe what's the difference :)

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[cgreuter]

Some other suggestions:

1. Use snail-mail. A lot of people, political types especially, consider it more meaningful if you go to the trouble of writing an actual letter on paper. Also, use a word-processor, good paper and a good printer. And proof-read it.
2. Send copies to the PM and the heads of the other major parties. Right now, there's a minority government. The other parties are capable of doing something about this.
3. In your letter, make it clear that this isn't about getting movies or music for free. Explain that you're more than willing to pay a fair price to the artists and content companies but that you want to be able to use the stuff you've bought in the way that you want to.
4. Apropos this, you also need to explain how this will be bad for Canadians in general. DRM is bad for technological innovation and for independant content providers since it gives the big players the tools to lock out the little guys. This is especially bad for Canada, a bilingual and multicultural society, since virtually all of the non-English-language content creators are small players.
5. Know your stuff. Cite references if you can.
6. Be careful when talking about "freedom of speech". Some people consider that "freedom of porn", and they disapprove of porn. You're much better off saying "freedom of the press", "accountable government" or "free and democratic society". Nobody can really argue with that in public.

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert on this, so take my advice with a grain of salt, or tell me why I'm wrong.

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[MrYotsuya]

I hope you don't mind if I quote that nearly verbatim when I write my own MP.

Thanks, eh?

A fine point on it

[jhantin]

Slagging the incumbent administration is fine, indeed, the American Way. Slagging the nation itself, on the other hand, is a sure way to draw hostility.

Digits And Copyright

[EzInKy]

The musical note 'A' can be represented by the number 0x41. The color red by the number 0xFF0000. When governments pass laws restricting the sharing of digital content they are in fact outlawing the sharing of numbers. Am I the only one who sees the absurdity in this?

BLAME CANADA!

[MaTriXxx1]

sorry, couldnt resist

-1 karma
-1 flame bait

ObFuturamaRef

[Guppy06]

"Amazingly, the Canadian recording industry, which previously praised the reforms, now says they aren't good enough"

It doesn't go too far enough!

Question for you!

[aug24]

Q: If George Bush and Tony Blair jumped off a tall tower together, who would hit the ground first?

A: Who cares!

J.

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, Chris! :-)

Good points, all of them.

I'd add, if I may, a 7th point.

Point # 7: the tricky one..

Phone your MP's office, and ask to talk to them. If possible, take a group of concerned friends, and hand them a signed petition. It's hard to ignore a group of people who take time out of their busy day to talk about dull, boring topics like copyright.

In my opinion, #1 and #3 are the most important. Points #4 and #5 take more work, but matter less: politicians care most about votes and public perception, and less about consistant rationelle. Geeks think making sense matters; anyone who's listened to MPs debate know it doesn't matter that much to them. It's all about the sound bite.

Point #6 is a notion so depressing that I'd never considered it, but it's probably true. "Freedom of speech is bad, because then people might use it for things our religions teach us to disapprove of". *sigh* Annoying, and hypocritical, given a recent poll said 94% of people used the internet for porn...

I was going to talk about the "freedom of creative expression", and the right to be innovative; and argue that while copyright is intended to reward of the original author for his intellectual discoveries, it also acts to block any further innovations by anyone else.

Since "innovation" is the golden buzzword used to justify a much of these new IP reforms, it plays rather well to point out the ways in which a given law may hinder "innovation" as well.

Just a few thoughts,

Kevin

Re:some other suggestions

[Stavr0]

excellent points. +1 insightful

Something I've always wondered...

[Anonymous Coward]

...Roch Voisine, among many others.

So - Roch Voisine vs. a parabola. Who would win?

Re:the laws need reform

[Anonymous Coward]

Just so you know in future... that troll you replied to is a well-used one on /.

It probably gets used as much on copyright and music stories as the "it took 17 minutes to copy a file" troll for Mac stories :)

Re:Time to use that stationery you got for christm

[myov]

It's not free.

Unlike the US, we pay a tax on all blank media. The idea is that it compensates the artist for the copying (how exactly is another question. The group which controls this tax wanted to raise it a few years ago, but didn't actually pay any of it out). The music industry recently tried to also have it cover anything that could potentially store music - not just iPods, but hard drives and media cards.

In Canada, it's currently legal to download music, an extension of the law that you can borrow music and copy it for your own use. As well, we're paying for the ability to do (above). What's illegal is uploading music, or copying your music and giving the copy away. It's already illegal so we don't need any more file sharing laws.

As far as I see it, CRIA wants it both ways. They've tried other US-style tactics, which were all struck down by Canadian courts. They want the income from the blank media tax, but want copying to be illegal. Pick one. We can't be paying a tax to allow an activity which is illegal.

If this passes, I'll be asking for a cheque for the tax I've paid on all the blank media I've bought.