Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Misleads On Canadian Copyright Reform

An anonymous reader writes "As the battle rages over a Canadian DMCA, Microsoft Canada has published an op-ed in a political newspaper that Michael Geist describes as astonishingly misleading and factually incorrect. Microsoft tries to argue that Canadian copyright law provides no legal protections, even after it received one of the largest copyright damage awards in Canadian history just one year ago."

12 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Telling warnings of economic damage by sugarmotor · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The article states

    But as is often the case, such discussions can have a real significance for individual jobs and on our economy in a broader sense.
    ... translates as "My employer is worried about their source of income"

    Stephan

    --
    http://stephan.sugarmotor.org
  2. What is misleading is the /. summary by d_jedi · · Score: 4, Informative

    The MS article is factually accurate - copyright law does not protect ideas expressed in works. Mr. Geist even updated the posting to reflect this.

    --
    I am the maverick of Slashdot
    1. Re:What is misleading is the /. summary by trolltalk.com · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The article itself gives examples that aren't true. The author of the article is Michael Eisen, chief legal officer at Microsoft Canada, based in Toronto.

      Maybe a reader who lives in Ontario, Canada (and thus has standing) can do us all a favour and file a complaint with the Ontario Bar for Eisen's breech of professional ethics in misleading the public, and bringing the practice of law into disrepute.

    2. Re:What is misleading is the /. summary by flyingsquid · · Score: 4, Funny

      Also, it's not called the DMCA in Canada, it's called the DMCEH.

    3. Re:What is misleading is the /. summary by thirty-seven · · Score: 5, Informative

      ... file a complaint with the Ontario Bar [link to Ontario Bar Association] for Eisen's breech of professional ethics ...

      IANAL, but I think such a complaint should be filed with the Law Society of Upper Canada.

      The Ontario Bar Association, founded in 1907, is a voluntary organization of lawyers, judges, and law students. Its website says that it represents lawyers' interests to governments and other organizations and "provides lawyers with opportunities to become more efficient and effective, to further their professional education and to keep abreast of current developments within the profession, nationally and provincially". So, in spite of its name, the Ontario Bar Association is not the bar.

      The Law Society of Upper Canada, founded in 1797, when Ontario was called Upper Canada, is "the governing body for lawyers and paralegals in Ontario" and "the Law Society regulates the legal professions in the public interest according to Ontario law and the Law Society's rules, regulations and guidelines." So, I believe that it is the bar.

      Aside: According to the Law Society's website: "The creation of this self-governing body by an Act of the Legislative Assembly was an innovation in the English-speaking world."

      --

      Atheism is a religion to the same extent that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

  3. Why wouldn't they? by esocid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why wouldn't they mislead about copyright reform. They already abuse the broken patent system and now are trying to claim that Linux violates their patents. They are just trying to perpetuate this broken system that is in need of good reform. We'll see how many people really call them on this bs.
    M$:You stole our code.
    L:No we didn't. Show us.
    M$:I'm sorry that is a trade secret, just take our word for it.

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
    1. Re:Why wouldn't they? by setagllib · · Score: 3, Informative

      The claim against Linux is purely on patents, not on copyright. The SCO case was on copyright and that was very easy to disprove once some specific code claims were made. Microsoft can't accuse Linux developers of code theft based on patent violations. "Intellectual property" theft is a stretch even then, as patents can be infringed independently.

      --
      Sam ty sig.
  4. The Worst Part... by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The worst part of this (beyond Microsoft's outright self-serving lies) is that most Canadians are horribly uninformed/misinformed about copyright laws and will believe virtually anything they hear making copyright FUD north of the border very effective. It would be nice if more people, like Michael Geist, tried to get the truth out there but sadly his sort are rare...

  5. Busted Microsoft by lancejjj · · Score: 4, Informative

    In years past, there was no way that Microsoft would have approved such a weak op-ed piece. Maybe some low-level manager approved this one, because it is simply an embarrassment to the company - with ridiculous examples that a high school student could rip apart regardless of the interpretation of their text.

    Sadly, Microsoft is at the point where it needs to step up its game and change the way it does business if it wants to remain relevant. This piece, and the purchase of Yahoo, are all signs that Microsoft can no longer manage to design its own future - instead, it needs to look to the outside to fix its internal shortcomings.

    To me, that means that Microsoft will be more apt to try to buy its way out of management failures - by buying companies such as Yahoo - which in turn will bring great new ideas and assets to Microsoft, but at the huge expense of making Microsoft substantially harder to manage.

    It could work out, but it's a slippery, dangerous slope, similar to (but different than) going into massive debt. But instead of a direct financial debt, it will be a huge on-going management burden - one that could only be controlled with strong merger-centric leadership.

    History is full of merger failures due to culture clashes. I doubt Ballmer is the guy that can pull it off. My prediction - Ballmer be put in the twilight in 2 years or less. You heard it from me.

  6. "LYING" by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Misleading"? "Factually incorrect"? Why will no one reporting on lies just come out and call them lies? By pulling these punches, the writers/editors/publishers are lying.

    There, I said it. And I feel better already for telling the truth.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  7. Re:Truth? Microsoft? by causality · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For that matter, why does anyone expect truth from any party with a vested interest? Microsoft isn't special in that regard.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  8. Re:Why doesn't Microsoft... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I never understood why people could be against Microsoft yet for Ron Paul at the same time. Isn't Ron Paul for small government hence no anti-trust laws (not mandated in the Constitution, right) which means that Microsoft wouldn't be punished for being a monopoly? Microsoft wouldn't be able to pervert the legal system, legislature, and bureaucracy into protecting and promoting its monopolistic practices, either.

    We're willing to take our chances on whether they have a "natural monopoly" without the 3-trillion-pound gorilla mostly fighting on their side.
    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way