Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canadians Battling Proposed Canadian DMCA

Posted by kdawson on from the leave-us-a-commons-eh dept.

An anonymous reader writes "CTV reports on how Canadians are fighting back against the Canadian DMCA. Led by Michael Geist, the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group is nearing 90,000 members. There are local chapters, a YouTube contest, wikis, and people writing letters and organizing rallies against the copyright bill. Geist said, 'When you get tens of thousands of Canadians speaking out like this, there's big political risk for any political party who chooses to ignore it.'"

16 of 202 comments (clear)

  1. No Worries by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Prentice and the Tories don't need to worry about voters. I'm sure they've been paid handsomely by American media giants for their co-operation.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    1. Re:No Worries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That may be true in the US, but in Canada the general public seems to put a little more effort into elections than just voting for the person who has the most signs on front lawns.

    2. Re:No Worries by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, they say you can't buy votes but that's not really true and you know it. Who cares if 2000 knowledgable voters get pissed at you if 5000 clueless voters vote for you instead with your new campaigning budget? It doesn't really matter where and why the vote comes from, a vote is as good as any other. People don't want to hear the truth, they want to hear how you'll make their lives so much better so it's tough to call someone on talking bullshit - even when they're not pimping some lobbyist agenda they are telling you sweet, sweet lies.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:No Worries by mixmatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What makes you think that the 70% that vote is not representative of 100% of the voting populace? Or, for that matter, that the 30% that did not vote really had anything to contribute to the voting pool. Perhaps the message from voting advocates should not be, "You have an obligation to vote, so go vote." I would think a more appropriate message would be, "We would like for everyone to inform themselves and make an educated decision about the candidates, but if you are unable to do so, by all means DON'T VOTE."

    4. Re:No Worries by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You also don't do votes for 75% of the positions we do.

      A fact that I am infinitely grateful for. Electing judges and district attorneys, for example, is pure madness.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    5. Re:No Worries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My precise thoughts about encouraging everyone to vote, even if they have no clue about what they are voting on! The obligation should be to find out what they are voting on, what the likely actions of the proposals are, and THEN cast an educated vote.

      Having people who don't have a clue is part of how we got gw bush.

    6. Re:No Worries by gmack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually in Canada politicians are not allowed to take donations from corporations and individuals are limited to small donations.

      The problem here is not money it's the previous government signing a treaty that makes something like the DMCA a requirement and the US ambassador lobbying on behalf of the RIAA/MPAA threatening to damage Canada's economy with a trade war.

      The other real problem is that Prentice doesn't have enough of a backbone.

    7. Re:No Worries by Caged · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you have compulsory voting politicians are forced to address issues that matter to their electorate (rather than just the subset who are voters) and people who otherwise would cynically ignore elections are forced to pay attention to their choices and how they will be affected by them.

      Speaking from experience living in a country that has compulsory voting your opinion is incorrect. Just like non-compulsory voting you have blocs who are dedicated to one party or another and rarely change based on the issues raised at election. Indeed this steady bloc who are forced to vote makes it much harder for a seat to change hands as the candidate or party has to really tick off the electorate for those rusted-on supporters to change their mind and help tumble the incumbent out of power. (Also known as a protest vote). Hence with compulsory voting apart from the protest vote, the other way for change to occur is for the demographic of the electorate to change. Eg, for agricultural seats to acquire a more cosmpolitan community.

      Non compulsory elections seem to be won by those who can encourage the largest number of people to get out there and vote.

      I'm not sure which system is better.

    8. Re:No Worries by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree. That's why we vote for people in the first place. So that they can represent us. I personally would find it quite time consuming to educate myself to the point where I could be comfortable voting for 20 different offices. Municipal, Provincial, and Federal are enough for me. I'm electing those people so they can run things, not so they can hold even more elections to get my opinion on a bunch of other stuff.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    9. Re:No Worries by canuck57 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      These tories have been warned, enact this legislation and they will be destroyed politically. Harper won't be able to run for village mayor after we're through with him.

      But it does show in majority governments in Canada, they are term dictators. The senate is nothing more than old patronage buddies collecting big bucks to rubber stamp things. But fortunately we are in a minority government situation which makes the dictatorship more tenuous.

  2. No conspiracy theory here by DesScorp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Despite the conspiracy theories you're likely to hear about this, the reason why the DMCA sailed through Congress is the same reason it'll sail through Canada's legislative process... media companies are responsible for a nice chunk of GNP (and whatever they call it in Canada), and neither side, liberal or conservative, is willing give up that wealth. And both sides believe that things like high technology for consumers and piracy is a danger to their broadcasters and publishers.

    The reason opponents are going to lose on this is that all major parties will be on board with the copyright holders. And average voters don't give a rat's ass about copyright reform crusades.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:No conspiracy theory here by Cecil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's the point in bringing down the government if the end result is to end up where you started?

      Well, some would say principles but we all know there's no room for that in politics.

      --
      Random and weird software I've written.
  3. Re:Political Repurcussions by jacquesm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's because there really is only one side in US politics, the one with the money.

    As long as TV advertising is the way to get voters this will not change.

    --
    MP3 Search Engine
  4. It needs to be said... by Dzimas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Michael Geist is a shining example of why academics are critically important in society - and why governments detest them. His running analysis of bill C-61 has been eloquent, straightforward and polite. He has earned a loyal following be clearly explaining what the flaws of the legislation are and how they will impact Canadians in everyday use (for example, how the Government is touting the clauses that grant timeshifting and device shifting rights while glossing over the fact that other parts of the legislation effectively neuter consumer rights where DRM is involved).

    Dr. Geist's blog posts and editorials in several major Canadian newspapers encouraged me to write to several members of parliament after a lifetime of political apathy. More importantly, I've done my best to explain the legislation's flaws to others, too, in the hope that they will take action. Several have, also for the first time.

  5. Educated and Informed -- about issues. by Safiire+Arrowny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think he means educated and informed about the issues they're voting for, not IQ or whether they're 'school' educated.

  6. It's funny what you get used to. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It just struck me, reading this thread, how really fucked up the implied procedure at work here is.

    We have a bill, moving forward, over which the citizenry seems to be divided between those opposed and those apathetic. And, nevertheless, the bill has a credible shot at passing, and this is treated as a fairly unremarkable occurrence. The fact that legislation can happen, in absence of popular support, unless some(large) quantity of displeasure materializes, is a seriously broken imitation of representative government.

    It shouldn't take mass protest to kill legislation that has near zero popular support, it should simply die as a matter of course. How did we come to accept a situation where that isn't the case?