Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Gov't Considers Plan To Block Public Domain
An anonymous reader writes "Canada celebrated New Year's Day this year by welcoming the likes of Ernest Hemingway and Carl Jung into the public domain just as European countries were celebrating the arrival of James Joyce and Virginia Woolf, 20 years after both entered the Canadian public domain. The Canadian government is now considering a plan to enter trade negotiations that would extend the term of copyright by 20 years, meaning nothing new would enter the public domain in Canada until at least 2032. The government is holding a public consultation with the chance for Canadians to speak out to save the public domain."
Who's paying for this legislation? Is it the same cast of characters that does the same shenanigans in the US?
Sanity.html - Error 404 not found
The public domain needs to be defended from the government? That thing that supposedly represents the will of the public?
Holy shit, what a world we live in.
Wikileaks shows the US government and especially the State Dept. work on behalf of the big moneyed interests which historically were US organizations but not so much today. I'm just waiting for the day a leak shows them going to bat for Chinese interests.
Just recently we have news of them actually threatening Spain to be more draconian and not that many years ago they were threatening Spain again but that time it was to allow GM foods wholly "owned" by Monsanto to the point where they were directly planning with Monsanto execs on the maneuver.
Other nations do it a little but nobody has topped the USA at it; one of the few things we are still #1 at. (see France and the privatization of water.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
... and are deciding whether to be pwned or not.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
This is getting beyond stupid.
If it applied retroactively. IMSLP and Wikilivres, of course, would have to scour their archives for all those infringing works (it might be a bit easier for IMSLP because of the [TB] tag, but still.)
even if (err, when) this law is passed, it should apply only to works published after it came in effect.
(yeah, right).
Sadly, this is all but done deal. Traditional Canadian values are being traded for closer ties with US. Conservative Harper government has an ability to pass this, in exchange getting border harmonization (less restrictions on shipping) with US.
Same song different tune.
Palm trees and 8
It is the money being used to buy off US politicians, who then put pressure on Canadian politicians. The US is Canada's biggest trading partner and visa versa, so what the US wants has a big impact on what the Canadians do.
Palm trees and 8
The US probably has a hand in this. Just like the article yesterday dealing with Spain.
Why bother with a free people when you can kill anyone that objects, or threaten to move the work elsewhere - as bids to divide the people amongst themselves?
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
America has forgotten something important about canadian parliament. Namely, that it is a wholly divorced entity from the united states and free to make laws, rules and regulations sans-input from it; which is coincidentally completely divorced from the concept of 'soverign nationality.'
if the wikileaks cables expose anything, its the fact that america hasnt just been instructing the cadence to which the world will march, its been fitting the boots and tightening the slacks in which the world marches as well.
So as an american taxpayer who believes in a free and democratic, soverign nation for all those who seek it, I can only hope canada will through consideration completely disregard this attack on the rights and freedoms of canadian citizens.
Good people go to bed earlier.
... and just print some money and hand it to these bozos to leave us alone? I mean we can't pretend anymore that there's any fairness at all. Copyright was some kind of a deal in which both parties contributed with something: "the people" agreed to let "the authors" have some kind of unnatural monopoly over how some specific information is distributed with the understanding that they'll get back after a while some more interesting information in return. Free for share and for recycling in any way we see fit.
Already life of the author plus 50 years or whatever is whatever relevant jurisdiction is ridiculously high and defeats the spirit of copyright. Heck, there's freakin' JULES VERNE still under copyright (and really hard to find if you are on the wrong continent).
Life + 70 years is just a spit in the face. It should be like patents, about 20 years, with the need for explicit extensions. And a DRM-free copy of the original should be provided in escrow to some state organization which should make sure at the date when the copyright expires the DRM-free copy is available for everyone. Or you chose your poison: copyright will not protect you if the copy you distribute has DRM. Either it's mine to do whatever I am legally allowed to do OR you don't come crying that you want to sue a printer in some campus for "distributing copyrighted work".
If I'm not mistaken Canada is also one of the countries where if you want to back-up your pictures (for example) to CD it's presumed that you infringe copyright and you have to pay some fee no matter what, isn't it? I think this goes back to my original argument that there's no rhyme or reason to the laws, just get what you can for whatever pretext.
...I urge every Canadian reading this to send an e-mail expressing your (reasonably worded and well-considered) views to consultations@international.gc.ca. I also suggest that you write to or e-mail your Minister of Parliament, and any other MP's that are involved in the process of destrying the Public Domain in Canada.
In the past these letter writing campaigns have resulted in unfavourable and unfair Internet legislation in Canada being rejected, and although the current Conservative majority does not bode well for maintaining a healthy Public Domain, it's still worhwhile trying. In my view these issues are like elections - if you don't weigh in and make yourself heard, you have no right to complain about the outcome. So please raise your voices in an effort to stop this ill-conceived attack on the public good.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
the Harper government will, too.
I'd have less objections if the legislation changed the length of term for NEW items, BUT didn't change the length of EXISTING copyrights...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Is that as a Canadian citizen I needed to learn about this on Slashdot, so much for public consultation!
If Canada follows through and adds 20 more years to our copyright we may as well give up our status as a sovereign nation and either become the 51st State or join the European Union. Foreign interests have no place in Canadian law. I wrote my e-mail of complaint - and so should you.
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
And yes, I know our Constitution doesn't apply in Canada but that line embodies the reasoning behind copyrights; the promote the progress of science and the arts. Not to ensure decades worth of revenue for a fucking publishing company that didn't even create the work in the first place.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
The reason the government of Canada passes so many laws favourable to the US is that since roughly 85% of our exports are to them, if they add some new tariffs or restrictions they could wreck our economy. They've already started doing this with some regulations regarding lumber, and they could simply start problems in other areas. So while Harper may be a shill for the US or not, no Canadian government can really stand up to pressure from the US without deeply hurting our economy. My guess is that this is simply some back-door strong-arming from the US, like they've been doing lately to places like Spain.
And given its length, I was bound to find one thing that I agreed with.
I personally happen to support the notion of the death penalty as well for a limited number of types of crimes.
Pretty much everything else in that list I either disagree with or had not previously formed any position.
For what it's worth, I didn't vote Conservative.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Michael Geist wrote the article. Please credit him: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6225/125/
... consider this one, which is purely economic:
If copyrights are extended by 20 years, the entire Canadian public is deprived of value, which is handed mostly to holders of existing copyrights. What are you getting in return?
If the answer is 'nothing', then why would your MP, whose sole job is to represent the Canadian public, vote for this?
If the answer is 'more creativity', then that statement would need considerable backup before it's worthwhile changing the status quo, considering the loss involved. Last I checked there was no shortage of new novels, films and so on, and no indication that more money for the creators in the long distant future would change that.
And if the answer is 'appeasing other countries', then someone needs to justify the value of such appeasement.
Anything else would seem to be a dereliction of the MP's duty.
If you're purely looking to give more value to new works, then you don't have to change the copyright term for old ones. The creators knew what they signed up to when the work was created: changing that deal now cannot possibly be fair.
This is all about the publishers ability to get every last dime they can from an author. People with e-readers/books can download these works for nothing, and that has these publishers in a tizzy. They have stocks of these books that they can't rid of.
Harper is caving to these interests.
... if they could also see to it that another 20 years is tacked onto the term of my mortgage.
Alright, perhaps I don't see the issue here...it would be nice to be able to keep works in the public domain but does having them stay copyrighted seem to stop anyone? Considering the current state of things, this seems like a mere formality...
The government is holding a public consultation with the chance for Canadians to speak out to save the public domain."
Tee hee. It's so cute when people think that they can make a difference. The Tories have majority, which means that they will do exactly what they want, when they want, and only what they want.
This thing is a done deal, and no amount of punditry and internet petitioning is going to change it.
Three Squirrels
We all know the drill by now.
The government will listen intently to everybody, then do exactly what Big Copyright told them to do.
...laura
Instead of just automatically extending copyrights for all content for another 20 years, why wouldn't the government allow for a copyright holder to apply for *and pay for* the extension of the copyright.
A lot of copyright holders simply want to sit on their exclusivity and not do anything with it. If the content is really worth something, this will encourage the copyright holders to weigh the opportunity cost of extending the copy right (probably worth it for truly good content) or letting it expire. This would encourage copyright holders to make better use of the time period they can profit from the content. And if they find it's really worth it, they can pay to continue profiting from it. Otherwise, give people access to it!
An interesting tangent fact: the original Goerge A. Romero classic Night of the Living Dead is in the public domain because the copyright did not appear on the title screen in the film, a requirement to maintain copyright at the time.
I'm more worried about them cutting into our unlimited internet. That will have broad implications for anonymyty on the internet.
This is terrible too, but most people who seem educated about the subject feel like the system as a whole is already too long. What matters twenty more years when we're going to move it to 10 - 20.
How about we extend copyright to the point of the property being totally fucking useless to anyone.
Again we see the foolishness of copyright. If we need it to function as a society (and that is a very, very big IF), then the maximum term should be five years, no more. That is enough time for any content creator to bring their product to market and gain any recognition they deserve.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Is this going to end like the one where Canadians were asked about copyright only to have our remarks considered as outlandish because obviously the public has no idea what it's talking about. The government under Harper is acting disgracefully, they work with nobody, listen to nobody and follow their own agenda.
I went to Mr. Geist's web site, but I didn't find any "Don't extend copyright" template letter .
I would recommend to find a copy of the Kopimi document and send it to consultations@international.gc.ca as a template response and in support to not extend copyright.
Virii is the plural for computer virus. And viruses is another. Take your pick, they're both perfectly good words. One might be much less common than the other, but anyone immediately knows what is meant by either of the two, and both are in wide enough use to be instantly recognized by most people. Therefore virii is a word, and continuing to insist that it ain't is exactly like the stubborn insistence only a few decades ago that ain't wasn't a word either. Irregardless is a word, now, as well, despite its highly annoying etymology.
...
Similarly, "begs the question" has changed meanings. I don't even know what the original meaning was supposed to be, and I have never in my entire life ever heard or read it used in that sense, other than on this website. Its original meaning is well on its way to gaining the archaic classification, and I'm sorry, but when you so self-righteously flame someone else for "incorrectly" using it, all that happens is I think you're more interested in making yourself feel superior than in contributing to the discussion.
Now I'd better go put on my asbestos suit
The only thing I'd add to your entry, is asking our fellow canadians to tell their friends, family, everyone in fact, to send such an email by spreading the word on Facebook, Google+, Twitter, or any other means you have. Hey, we're in a connected world now, let's show them that we're able to use those connections for a meaning!
Animoog.org
Just to add to your post, the email *needs* your name & address.
From Mr Geist's blog:
The consultation is open until February 14, 2012. All it takes a single email with your name, address, and comments on the issue. The email can be sent to consultations@international.gc.ca. Alternatively, submissions can be sent by fax (613-944-3489) or mail (Trade Negotiations Consultations (TPP), Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Trade Policy and Negotiations Division II (TPW), Lester B. Pearson Building, 125 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2).
I sent my email with a "don't extend copyright/patent 'protection'" message. Mine was somewhat personal, so not appropriate for making a template from: anyone feel like ofering up a boilerplate for the lazier folks?
Further to your comment (and re-posting this as original post from hours ago hasn't shown up!?!), do not forget to add your name & address to the email!
From Mr Geist's blog:
All it takes a single email with your name, address, and comments on the issue. The email can be sent to consultations@international.gc.ca. Alternatively, submissions can be sent by fax (613-944-3489) or mail (Trade Negotiations Consultations (TPP), Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Trade Policy and Negotiations Division II (TPW), Lester B. Pearson Building, 125 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2).
I bet this'll end up being a double-post, but I swear the original isn't visible as I write this.
A recent radio announcement indicated that any industry based on copyright is doomed. 99% of DVDs in developing countries are pirated, as perhaps a somewhat smaller amount is happening in developing countries too.
In these countries, where poverty was so rampant, it was do that or do without. The middle class in these countries evolved and are more able to afford to pay for the material (DVD, etc), but are so accustomed to getting it for the cost of the DVD blank, or $1.00, that they are not willing to change.
The same mindset is underway in North and South America, it was noted.
Sigh, RIAA, start looking at reality-- you are moving into history in the same way that Kodak is staying in the film industry.
Don't forget all the contradictory stuff as part of their ideology.
In addition to all the above:
Believes in smaller Government, but has the biggest government ever of any Canadian government.
Believes is conservative spending, but has spent more, and had more debt than any government ever.
Believes in reforming the Senate, but has appointed more senators than any Canadian government ever.
Etc...