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
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.
This is getting beyond stupid.
In Soviet Canada government blocks YOU, eh!
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
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
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.
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!
... 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.
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
Read up on the soft-wood lumber dispute. Time after time it was found that America was violating NAFTA .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_%E2%80%93_Canada_softwood_lumber_dispute
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
I support the notion of death penalty in theory, in a sense that I can imagine quite a few crimes for which it would be an appropriate punishment.
That said, I don't see how I could possibly support it in a less-than-perfect (i.e. any real-world) justice system, where innocents can and are pronounced guilty. Of all other forms of punishment, death penalty is the only one that cannot be reversed. If someone spends 20 years in prison for something they didn't done, it's still horrible, but at least we can let them out and give them a good amount of cash to try to compensate for the injustice. But you can't dig out the corpse and bring it back to life.
Interestingly enough, this seems to be the same though process by which Judaism has arrived to a de facto ban of death penalty, even though it is proscribed for many crimes in the Torah.