Slashdot Mirror
Delays to Canadian DMCA Could Doom Act
Jabbrwokk writes "Michael Geist reports legislation to create a Canadian version of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act has been delayed again, possibly because of massive public outcry, and possibly even because of opposition from the industry itself. Canada's biggest ISPs have banded together to oppose the proposed new legislation and suggest their own solution, which include allowances for expanded fair dealing, private copying, no liability for ISPs and legislation that concentrates its wrath on commercial pirates instead of penny-ante downloaders and seeders.'"
If the law were fair, making a copy of any copyrighted work on media bought in Canada would be totally legal.
Yes, a copyright levy is collected on CD-Rs and other media to compensate artists for personal copies of musical works, which is permitted under the Copyright Act. If I borrow a friend's music CD and copy that CD on to media purchased under the levy then I have broken no law. The caveat is a person must make the copy for themselves; you cannot make the copy for a friend and then give it to them. Of course, there is absolutely no way of determining this.
Biggest difference in Canada? We have a habit of tossing out political parties that piss us off. We can get away with it because there are 4-5 major parties active at any one time, so easy enough to out with the old and in with the new. And there is always a couple parties that have to compete to be the new big dogs.
.6% (2 out of 295). Do that once or twice and your politicians will get the message.
And when we get rid of a party, they are gone. In 1993, one of the Conservative parties passed unpopular tax laws. They went from controlling 57% of the seats to controlling
I think this parallel between the monarchy/figureheads in Canada and the eagle in the US is being taken just a little too literally now.
And they couldn't possibly, I don't think. Governments here are a lot more inclined to regulate than they are in the US, and the ISPs are very, very well aware of that. If something like that went through, the ISPs are know damned well all the regulation, requirements, and red tape they'd have to deal with .... and all on their own dime.
Free markets are a good thing. But sometimes, even just *presence* of a government willing to interfere is enough to make everybody play nice.
I think the main reason for the saner laws in this parliament is due to the minority. If any party has a majority we'll get some pretty crazy bills passed through the House. IMHO we should just keep minority governments around forever - it keeps legislation sane and relatively nonpartisan.
I think the fact that Canadians actually have a law to make it illegal to engage institutionalized bribery doesn't make it impossible to influence government through money... It just means the US have been needing such a tool for years, and managed not to get it.
Having the tool won't remove ALL bribery... But without the law, it just means the bribery(ahem "Lobbying") is legal... I just wish I understood why most US citizens have been so convinced their system is superior for so long that when someone shows them an idea they can use, they refuse to even consider the matter...
I double-dog dare them to. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot by eliminating 26-million easily-accessible customers (English-speaking Canadians). But, more importantly, they wouldn't do it because they know that their rhetoric is bullshit.