Slashdot Mirror
US Group Wants Canada Blacklisted Over Piracy
An anonymous reader writes "Following up on an earlier story, the IIAA wants to add Canada to a blacklist of the worst intellectual property offenders. A powerful coalition of U.S. software, movie and music producers is urging the Bush administration to put Canada on an infamous blacklist of intellectual property villains, alongside China, Russia and Belize. 'Canada's chronic failure to modernize its copyright regime has made it a global hub for bootleg movies, pirated software and tiny microchips that allow video-game users to bypass copyright protections', the International Intellectual Property Alliance complains in a submission to the U.S. government."
"The problem of unauthorized camcording of films in Canadian theatres is now nearing crisis levels," the group complained.
Crisis levels? People are dying?
No, it's a fucking camcorder recording of a hollywood movie. All the bad things about watching the movie in the theator in the privacy of your own home.
If this is really a problem, it's because the movies suck and early word getting out about how bad the movie is is hurting sales. Simple solution to that; Stop making crap movies.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I'm not educated about this issue, but what if it's actually a chronically different ideology that prevents Canadians (I am one of them) from adapting American-style anti-consumer laws.
Over video games?
Cool.
Let's say Canada is on the black list. Then all countries on the black list would only do business togeter and not with the US anymore. Would the US make that mistake? Stoping billions in profits just for some millions lost? That would be so funny (MPAA, etc, shooting themself in the foot). But that would proove a point. When Canada and all others would be on the list, and music and movies would still be on the net, it is at that time, that the shooting in the foot would begin.
No sig for now.
It would be interesting to know just what Canada's obligations are under the Berne convention or any other IP treaties they may have signed. Is this just a bunch of large corporations whining that the rights they think they ought to have aren't universally recognized, or is Canada actually breaking a treaty obligation? Or is the Berne convention sufficiently vague that both sides can plausibly believe they are right? What if a country doesn't want to participate in the Berne convention or trips anymore? (The US didn't sign on until 1989, now we're trying to force our IP laws on everyone else.)
The funny part is that until the 1970s it was the US that was the "rogue" nation on the international blacklist (and even had the gall to be proud of it), because it still held somewhat to the quaint ideas delineated in the Bill of Rights which are antithetical to a "guild" system of intellectual property.
Europe is the crucible from which "modern" (it's really fuedal, thus old fashioned, but what the hell. Nobody remembers anything before last Thursday anyway) copyright law was cast, but it's the converts that are almost always the biggest PITA fanatics; especially if there's money and power in it for them.
KFG
Take a look at Michael Geist's blog... he's the Lawrence Lessig of Canada.
;)
This message proudly paid by a Montreal Pirate! (whatever that means
Certainly not in Iraq. One of the first things Paul Bremer and the Coalition Provisional Authority introduced in the tatters of a starving nation back in 2003 was the implementation of US Copyright laws.
Possibly the first time a country was invaded for it's lax copyright laws. Watch out Canada!
Blacklisting Canada... What an excellent idea!
Let's say that the U.S. delayed the release of all films in Canada by several months, as they have already threatened to do. Suddenly, film release dates in Canada would no longer coincide with the hype in American media. Canadian consumers would have to endure months of temptation to download industry-insider-provided rips of screeners (not crappy camcorder copies) before films finally come out in Canada. That would certainly hurt good films, but those one-weekend-wonder stinkers that are massively promoted (and never shown to critics in advance) would flop bigtime in a fore-warned Canada. Overall, that's a lot fewer movie tickets sold. Who's going to pick up the slack? Maybe, just maybe, local Canadian film-makers. Quebec actually has a pretty good cinema going but English Canada has bugger all thanks to the abundance of american media. Anything that reduces the market share of american cinema is likely to cause a boom in Canadian film. Yes, american TV shows filming on the cheap in Canada might finally have a little competition for local talent, but who cares?
Market controls on foreign content in a nation's cinema have been shown to improve that nation's cinema. Just look at French cinema since WWII. Their government required that a certain percentage of films shown in French cinemas had to be French. U.S. production companies were financing cheap films just to boost the overall French market so they could release more films in France! Canada considered implementing similar legislation, but failed to do so, much to the detriment of our own nation's cinema. Canada's cinema could certainly benefit from market controls today, but implementing them would be political suicide for any who dared. The U.S. would cry foul over protectionism and Canadians used to american films would be very peeved about not being able to get their fix. However, if the kind americans were to do this for us...
This really is a win-win situation for Canada. The worst the U.S. can do to Canada is the best possible thing for Canada's cinema and the worst possible thing for american film makers. So *PLEASE* blacklist us. Pretty please! I freakin' double dare ya! Heck, BAN the release of american movies in Canada indefinately!
Canada could retaliate by putting the Yanks on the list of countries to whom they won't export oil or uranium.
Oil they can get elsewhere. You want to see them squirm, cut off their supply of nickel. Canada is the largest producer in the world of that metal.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Data simply doesn't have this property. Any argument based on the premise that it does is fallacious.
Ahh... but you are allowed to hit a nail, or your TV, or whatever else you want that won't hurt anyone.
It's true that making a copy of a CD for a friend in the United States is currently illegal. I would say that this is ethically equivalent to a law that says that says that it's illegal to walk anywhere - sure it helps the sales of cars and gasoline, but it's not a good law.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
...keep up the good work!
An outdated business model (and an outdated concept of information ownership) should not be preserved by the passing and enforcing of very stupid and harmful laws.
Keep turning up the volume on the "piracy" (sic) until the corporate masters get a clue and adapt.
Actually you should. Canada should Lead the way in blacklisting and restricting trade with the USA and get other countries of the world to also blockade the USA for it's predatory tactics and attempts to control the world and tell it how to think.
Anything less means you guys are simply the 51st state and do whatever we tell you like a good little female dog.
Down bitch! good Dog!
Problem is we own the UN and all the nations that are a part of it. Hell tony blair is not only a lapdog but he barks when commanded by us.
First of all, I am a Canadian, so I'm not speaking out of ignorance.
When it comes to standing up to Americans, we're all bark and no bite. After all, we accepted the Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA. We allowed Chapter 11 of NAFTA to get passed, a provision allowing corporations to sue Canadian governments for any laws that caused them to lose profits. Now would we allow a NAFTA provision that required Canada to price oil and gas the same as in the U.S., and to supply oil to the U.S. before ourselves, buying back the value-added refined product in the form of petroleum, and then committing to supply the U.S. first even in the event of an energy crisis. We allowed American companies to engage in massive numbers of takeovers of Canadian companies when the Canadian dollar was low, especially our oil companies, to the point that a substantially larger number of Canadians work for American owned companies than ever before. We allowed the federal government to outsource government data on Canadian citizens to U.S. companies operating on U.S. This has made our data subject to the U.S. "Patriot Act".
Countries whose citizens are truly negative toward the U.S. government and U.S. corporations, like Russia, wouldn't tolerate any of the above policies.
Sorry, but when it comes to standing up to the U.S. government and U.S. corporations, we're a bunch of weenies.
This space left intentionally blank.
It's making fun of a proponent of the global warming theory.
On Slashdot.
Alternatively, it may have been that poking fun at Al Gore is like kicking a fawn with broken legs, and he feels sorry for the poor guy.
Even more alternatively, it may be from a deep respect for the man who "took the initiative" in creating the internets.
Or it could even be that after 10 seasons, he's come to expect more out of what is, in the end, a crude cartoon show.
We have the same situation here in Britain.
This is the "first past the post, winner takes all" voting system we have, which together with our Monarchy.
Legally, the way it works is that, it is our Monarch (the queen) who appoints her government, and HER prime minister. As a Constitutional Monarch she is bound to represent the views of her citizens, who elect a Party to represent their views. The parties themselves elect a "leader" to lead the party and suggest roles for other members.
The final say though is the Queen, who is the person who actually appoints the ruling party, her Prime Minister, and the actual roles for her government. However, she is also bound to reflect the democratic views of her people/subjects, and virtually always appoints the party elected by the people, the prime minister is the leader elected by the winning party, and the cabinet members suggested by the new prime minister.
She then has the power of creating a new referendum (election) every 4 years, during which she dissolves the government, and selects the next government based on the views of the people.
This is how it works over here.
Have a nice day!
"Offtopic" my sphincter!
The interference of US politicos including DEA "advisors" on how to handle medical cannabis, US-led policy wonks who want us to charge a $75 levy on iPod and other media players to "recoup piracy losses", interference in our Kyoto protocol attempts, leveraging of "Income Trusts" as a tax loophole for fossil fuel companies to evade taxes, refusal by fossil fuel companies to pay the full royalties due on oil sands extraction, demands that we ignore US abuses of Canadian citizens under "anti-terrorism" "legislation" that never went through a proper judicial review in the US, refusal by the US to abide by NAFTA agreements on softwood even when their own courts say the US government is guilty, ...
Canada has a long, long list of grievances with the way the US interferes with our internal policies and government. The above is only a short list of some of the most important issues. Granted Shrub is only responsible personally for the so-called "War on Terror" and the related interference in our government's policies, but as the representative of the US government he is responsible for the entire pile during his tenure.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
What's wrong with South Park? They are far more fair and balanced than Fox could ever dream to be; they are an equal-opportunity offender. They make fun of Christians, Jews, and Muslims. They make fun of conservative and liberal extremists equally. Serially!
So they went with Al Gore's misspoken "Serial" and went to an extreme in poking fun at him. Big deal. They've made fun of Bush as well. Is making fun of Bush okay but not Saddam? What is your problem with it? If you can't stand the profanity and crassness of their style of satire, that's understandable and I somewhat agree with you. To cite "manbearpig" as being a turning point for South Park changing it from brilliant to decidedly unfunny simply because you disagree with the point of that episode, well, it's hypocritical if you are a Gore fan and a liberal. (as for me, I am more of a libertarian myself and dislike both extremes and the end result which is borne of each; huge government and excess interference in private lives)
Are you one of those liberals who preaches tolerance, except you hate everyone who disagrees with you? Here's the deal: tolerance is simply being mature enough to know to agree to disagree, and you know what, sometimes people may make fun of your point of view or you yourself. It's no big deal, and when you're a public goof like Al Gore is, you expect that sort of treatment. Hell, he has even made fun of himself by guest starring on one of his favorite shows (Futurama) so if he doesn't mind being roasted, why should you be offended?
Good god, learn to laugh a bit and see the other side's perspective.
Besides, ManBearPig was freaking hilarious. I'm super-serial!
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
The funny thing is, this is exactly the type of stereotyping that Americans are often criticized for. I was talking about a month ago with a very worldly fellow who is from France originally but has lived in something like 8 countries. I was quite surprised that he had the following unshakable beliefs:
When I tried to bait him with "French people wear berets, play tiny accordions, and never bathe" he didn't understand what I was doing. "See," he said, "Americans are completely ignorant about other cultures." Righto.
Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.