Slashdot Mirror
Canada Introduces DMCA-Style Copyright Law
P Starrson writes "The Canadian government this afternoon kept one promise many could live
without. It introduced new copyright legislation that will bring
DMCA-style legislation to Canada (backgrounder
and FAQ
here but bill still not online). Professor Michael Geist has
apparently seen a copy and points out on his blog
that while the bill does not go as far as the United States, the
proposal is full of new rights for the music industry with precious
little for users."
The moral is, the USA isn't really more corrupt or backward than many other governments out there. They were just the first to get it because that's where most the money is, and that's where the pressures of the information age hit first.
>When will "the users" realize that they elect the
>politicians?
When will they realize that the elected government actually does represent the general consensus of the people?
To me, that's much scarier than any conspiracy theory.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
> In the US he'd be broke already.
Common enough misconception - one that undoubtedly scares a lot of people into giving up rights.
Court fees are not as expensive as you've been led to believe. If I'm ever sued, there's no way I'll give up one single item of process. Have a hearing on EVERYTHING, and don't waive your right to have a jury at EVERY hearing.
Doesn't cost that much. I've done it. Won, too.
"Loser pays all legal expenses?" The obvious abuse there is for someone to file suit on some trivial matter, where the defendant is clearly wrong, but have millions of dollars in legal expenses paid to some lawyer who is a partner of the plaintiff.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
In my opinion, there is very little chance of this passing. Parliament is set to recess for the summer and this bill would have to go through first reading, second reading and committee or report stage and finally third reading all before summer recess or risk dying on the order paper. The Liberals are having trouble enough getting the same-sex marriage legislation to third reading stage, never mind a bill introduced this late.
I think the bill was introduced as a way of deflecting criticism for delaying implementation of recent WIPO intellectual property agreements and to appease lobby groups clamouring for action on the "theft" of music and movies on the internets after several reverses by the courts.
Q7 "Legitimate access as authorized by the Copyright Act, will not be altered.
3 9796
Circumvention for the purposes of making private copies of sound recordings will not be permitted, however.
See the Copyright act section 80
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/39673.html#rid-
At the very least they shouldn't lie in the FAQ describing a new law.
Time to contact your MP, remember it is free to snail mail them.
There are four parties right in the Commons with two independants as tiebreakers. Since the Liberals introduced the bill they are obviously going to vote for it.
That means they need the support of one more party (and possibly an independant) if this bill is going to pass. The Liberals will ask the NDP to pass this bill, but I think this bill might go against the pary policy (protecting peoples rights).
That leaves the oposition (The Conservative Party)which will not vote with the government and the Bloc, who hates the government. That means that if the NDP doesn't vote with the Librals this bill will not pass.
There is some hope.
That's not at all true. See here (specifically, the section on Private Copying. "The act [of copying a musical work such as an audio CD...] 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." I do not need to already own the copyrighted material. The whole presumption of innocence doesn't make much sense as everyone prosecuted for a crime (that is, for a criminal act) is presumed innocent in Canada (also, in the U.S.).
The Canadian legal system has shown quite plainly that you do not need to own the CD. You are not infringing copyright. In fact, you don't even need to be making a copy onto an audio recording medium for which you have paid a levy, or for which a levy would normally be exacted.
There's much more than just bill C-32, of course. There's the clear statements of the Copyright Board of Canada and there's case law. I'm sorry, but you are simply wrong on this. It is possible that what you state may apply if this new legislation gets passed, however, but my reading shows that it would still be legal to make a copy of a CD for private use. I cannot immediately cite that, however.
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
If you want change, I suggest you start a real petition. Don't worry, I'll sign.