US Group Calls Canada a Top Copyright Violator

eldurbarn tips a CBC story reporting that the US-based International Intellectual Property Alliance claims Canada has joined Russia and China among the biggest violators of US copyright law. Quoting: "The group's report is the latest to urge the US government into pressuring Ottawa to reform copyright laws." As we have previously discussed here, the current Conservative government had planned to introduce a new copyright law, but dissent from the privacy commissioner and a groundswell of public protest delayed that action. eldurbarn adds, "What makes this story so important now is that this pressure is being applied at a time and in a manner that may cause the Canadian government to fall, forcing an election." Meanwhile, on the other side of the rapidly heating debate, Michael Geist blogs about the forces arrayed against a Canadian DMCA. The Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright, which includes a who's who of the telecom, Internet, retail, and broadcast communities, has outlined a list of its copyright reform demands.

Comments

FUCK copyright law.

[jez9999]

Seriously, isn't that what you want to hear a politician just come out with? I'm so sick of greedy pricks in suits going around attacking anyone and everyone for infringing on their precious IP, and getting quoted in the media. Ignore them, for god's sake.

Re:Do you smell that?

[betterunixthanunix]

Economists love to talk about "loss" due to an item not being sold. Yes, according to economists, accountants, and the companies they work for, you can turn a profit and still take a loss. You could sell your entire stock, but it would be considered a loss if you could have sold it all twice as fast.

It is basically changing the meaning of the word, "loss." The record companies "lose $511 million per year due to copyright infringement" actually translates to, "had all the songs that were downloaded in a given year been purchased at the current market rate, the record companies would have made $511 million more than they did." For someone who is aware of the economist's meaning of "loss," this is obvious and the record companies don't seem that badly off (imagine if they said that they were actually spending $500 million more than they were taking in; they would be going bankrupt). For someone who is not aware of it, it is deceptive -- it makes it sound like the record companies are in serious financial peril, which is about as far from the truth as claiming that 2+2 = -8 i. That's what the companies want, of course.

Of course, even the economic sense of the word "loss" is dishonest, because the sales probably wouldn't have happened, especially in the case of students or people living in China (where the price of a CD is, for some people, equivalent to 1 week's pay).