Canada No Pirate Nation: Global Leader In Music Download Sales

clearly something must be done about this! by 0xdeaddead · 2012-06-06 02:54 · Score: 1

who will think of the children?

Re:clearly something must be done about this! by MonsterTrimble · 2012-06-06 03:09 · Score: 2

We are.

Sincerely, a Canadian Parent.

--
I call it 'The Aristocrats'

Global leader in music sales... by tiffany352 · 2012-06-06 02:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

And the recording industry is still hungry for money.

Re:Global leader in music sales... by 0xdeaddead · 2012-06-06 02:55 · Score: 4, Interesting

considering how many laws the write for us, I think its more than money, they seek ultimate power.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Tyr07 · 2012-06-06 03:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

RI is like homeless bums. You give them 20$ and they say, 'got any more?' and move on looking for more.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by tnk1 · 2012-06-06 03:13 · Score: 2

considering how many laws the write for us, I think its more than money, they seek ultimate power.
What is the difference?
Re:Global leader in music sales... by virgnarus · 2012-06-06 03:28 · Score: 1

"Change... do you have some change?"
Re:Global leader in music sales... by lister+king+of+smeg · 2012-06-06 03:33 · Score: 1

once you have the power to create law you no longer have to by congress to do it for you and you save money that you can then use for swimming in, prosecuting small childern and old ladies, butt rape the country and make even more money

--
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Random2 · 2012-06-06 03:34 · Score: 1

+5 Sad but true

--
"Our goal each year should be to increase the number of goals we set for ourselves!"
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:36 · Score: 3, Interesting

They're actually worse than homeless bums. They're more like predatory gypsy contractors. Granny had one come to her house to say he'd been working up the street and noticed a little problem with her roof. By the time they were done she'd been bilked out of almost $3000.00. Of course, you should have see the look on their faces when I walked up to them (i'm 6'3" and 250 pounds of just rolled down off the mountain ugly.) and told them that Granny had asked me to talk to them about when they were going to get all the little things they'd started beyond fixing the roof done.
That's what we need to deal with the recording industry, something big, ugly and with a clear sense of right and wrong and not some wobbly moral compass that depends on how much money it can smell coming form a certain direction.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:42 · Score: 1

As Peter Griffin once found out the hard way... money is not a liquid and swimming in money is therefore not recommended.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Vanderhoth · 2012-06-06 03:57 · Score: 3, Funny

Peter Griffin is a fictional character, you can't believe anything he says. Scrooge McDuck makes it very clear that money, especially the coin variety, it great for swimming in.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Gravitron+5000 · 2012-06-06 04:36 · Score: 1

There can be only one!
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Gravitron+5000 · 2012-06-06 04:37 · Score: 2

As a duck, he is more adapted to swimming than Peter, and hence has less of an issue swimming in coins.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Vanderhoth · 2012-06-06 05:05 · Score: 1

touché
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Master+Moose · 2012-06-06 08:28 · Score: 1

@ $750 minimum to legally get a copy of the report. . .

--
. . .gone when the morning comes
Re:Global leader in music sales... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-07 06:36 · Score: 0

and what is funny is that Canada is also in the list of top pirates as well.....weird...I could have sworn that the RIAA has sworn up and down that Piracy is killing sales.
Re:Global leader in music sales... by lsatenstein · 2012-06-07 23:05 · Score: 1

And the recording industry is still hungry for money.
No, they still want to force the Canadian government to implement USA laws.

--
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
Re:Global leader in music sales... by KingBenny · 2012-06-08 03:30 · Score: 1

yea, i see mtv and warner, lady haha and justin blabber ain't broke yet, the ones who don't get downloaded seem to have a hard time getting a deal ... sony kicks out 10k+ people and blames it on the yen for a change (how nice sony, thanks) and the world just keeps breeding more and more .... homo sapiens

--
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?

As a Canadian by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 02:55 · Score: 1

Sorry

Re:As a Canadian by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 06:23 · Score: 0

Get it right. It’s
Sorry, eh.

It's Our Penance by mrclisdue · 2012-06-06 02:58 · Score: 5, Funny

As a Canadian, I think I can speak for the country when I say that the reason we're a global leader in music download sales is that we feel so damn guilty for pirating all that stuff that we make amends by buying it.

Plus, how else can we push Justin Bieber to the top? Don't tell me non-canucks actually purchase his stuff, too?

We're just so damn polite. Sorry for the cuss words.

cheers,

Re:It's Our Penance by Mashiki · 2012-06-06 03:07 · Score: 1

Hey...
FUCK YOU!
Nah I'm sorry man...it just slipped out. I just got back from Toronto. Oh man...Toronto !@*(!.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
Re:It's Our Penance by masvitroy · 2012-06-06 03:13 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Nice info thank http://kerjawa.blogspot.com/
Re:It's Our Penance by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 05:01 · Score: 1

Whoa, calm down big fella. One too many double-doubles today or what?
Personally, I am cool with the try-before-you-buy concept of digital media. If I can watch a flick first, then I can determine what it's worth to me, and wait to find it for sale at the price I am willing to pay for it. It's exactly like customer-determined-value, except I have to wait a lot longer for the supplier-managed market to adjust.

Title? by schitso · 2012-06-06 02:59 · Score: 1

Where in TFA is it suggested that this has anything to do with a lack of piracy?

Re:Title? by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 03:05 · Score: 2

Where in TFA is it suggested that this has anything to do with a lack of piracy?
Good point. Maybe we just need lots of indoor entertainment for, like, 8 months of the year or something like that...more than we could handily pirate :)
Arrr...eh!

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 03:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

Piracy = increased sales? Canadians are one of the few who are protected under the law and can download as much pirated product as they like. The studies suggest that piracy leads to more purchases of the same type of material (music, movies, etc) so it can be true that we both pirate and purchase at the same time.
Re:Title? by tnk1 · 2012-06-06 03:17 · Score: 4, Interesting

I know people who pirated movies or video games the first time that were there on opening day to buy the sequels. People will support what they know is awesome because they want it to continue and they know that it will not continue if the makers can't feed their families and pay mortgages.
They have rather less interest in keeping rich executives rich. Or for that matter, even in keeping rich artists rich.
Re:Title? by anyGould · 2012-06-06 03:29 · Score: 3, Informative

Piracy = increased sales? Canadians are one of the few who are protected under the law and can download as much pirated product as they like. The studies suggest that piracy leads to more purchases of the same type of material (music, movies, etc) so it can be true that we both pirate and purchase at the same time.
Bear in mind we're "protected" because we pay a levy on blank media - effectively it's impossible for a Canadian to "illegally download" material because we've already paid for it when we bought the hard drive.
IP enforcement in Canada chases after the seeders, because that part is still illegal.
I'd account a fair bit of the sales increase to people ditching cable - between iTunes and Netflix, I can watch every show I want for substantially less than what cable would be. (I still get my internet and phone through the cable company because I loathe Telus with a fiery passion, so the cable company is content.)
Re:Title? by ZombieBraintrust · 2012-06-06 03:46 · Score: 1

According to the report the United States and the U.K. are number 1 and 2 on the list. Canada is number 3. Considering the shared culture between the UK, USA, and Canada it is not surprising that customers in these countries behave the same.
Re:Title? by dubbreak · 2012-06-06 04:35 · Score: 5, Informative

IP enforcement in Canada chases after the seeders, because that part is still illegal.
Citation needed. Have you heard about any uploading cases in the last 5-8 years?

Seems like the prolific US propaganda and lobbying on the subject has skewed your view (as with many Canadians). A precedent was set saying it was not illegal (BMG Canada Inc. v. JohnDoe). The appeal (which passed) stated that the legality still needs to be decided in court. To my knowledge it hasn't been tested yet (most likely due to the current legislation giving it a chance to go through as legal).

The Royal Canadian Mounted police's policy is: "Piracy for personal use is no longer targeted".

We covered this quickly in a law class (back in 2007) and the current state then was "not illegal". In order to make it illegal would require a risky court case (which I haven't heard of to date) or legislation (which the RIAA keeps trying to push in Canada and the Conservatives address periodically).

In conclusion: you have no excuse to be a leecher. Start seeding like the rest of us ;).

--
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
Re:Title? by willy_me · 2012-06-06 04:38 · Score: 1

Canadians face similar limitations when it comes to sharing music that other nations do. For example, it is illegal to share music covered by copywrite. While I believe the receiver is not considered to be at fault, the sender is. Those using bittorrent are just as guilty in Canada as they are in the US.
Also, the recent reports of Canada being a haven for pirated media are BS. It's a political game where the recording industries are trying to make it look like Canada needs tougher laws. Last I heard, the proposed law was struck down / derailed so it appears that the recording industries need to try harder.

The studies suggest that piracy leads to more purchases of the same type of material (music, movies, etc) so it can be true that we both pirate and purchase at the same time.
You're jumping to conclusions. I would say that if piracy is easy and provides HD media, then it is a bad thing. The industry should combat this by allowing for free, or add sponsored, distribution of their media in SD format. This would cut down on much of the piracy and keep most people doing things legally. They can then charge for HD media that doesn't suck (allow skipping commercials on discs I purchased you bastards!!).
It's almost like the question of legalizing marijuana. If left illegal it becomes a gateway drug and connects people with those who distribute drugs that are actually harmful. If legal, most people would never connect with the dealers of harmful drugs. Same with piracy - provide easy access to legit media and most will never visit the pirate bay.
Re:Title? by anyGould · 2012-06-06 04:57 · Score: 1

IP enforcement in Canada chases after the seeders, because that part is still illegal.
Citation needed. Have you heard about any uploading cases in the last 5-8 years?
Only anecdotal - my parent's got a nastygram from their ISP listing the various movies that a houseguest was torrenting. Nothing came of it (other than the houseguest losing internet privileges), but it tells me that someone is still paying attention.
Now, I don't personally worry too much (if only because I tend to torrent obscure things that no-one cares about, and as you mention, seeding is polite and leeching sucks), but it's worth taking note of.
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 05:12 · Score: 1

The original decision made it clear that downloading and seeding does not constitute authorization of infringement. That's not to say it protects those who engage in infringement and then distribute. ie: If I place a song I own in a shared folder that's not infringement, but if I do the same thing with something I do not own then the law doesn't protect me. The kicker here (and why it's not often pursued) is that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show how the material was obtained. If I downloaded something from a person in a country without copyprotection laws, or if I record a TV show on my computer to watch later, etc these are legal but if I upload a cam of a movie with a unique embedded ID then they may be able to prove I am the source of the infringement and go after me.
http://reports.fja.gc.ca/eng/2004/2004fc488/2004fc488.html
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 05:27 · Score: 2

Canadians face similar limitations when it comes to sharing music that other nations do. For example, it is illegal to share music covered by copywrite. While I believe the receiver is not considered to be at fault, the sender is. Those using bittorrent are just as guilty in Canada as they are in the US.
First, it's copyright. Second no they don't. In the above linked court decision the judge equated placing copyrighted music in a publicly shared folder (specifically citing P2P) is the equivalent of a library placing a photocopier in a room full of copyrighted books. The library is not authorizing you to copy a book, if you do that's on you. However, if you do copy something digital from a P2P network (or any other source) you have no way of knowing if the source is a legal one or not so you cannot be held libel for it.

The studies suggest that piracy leads to more purchases of the same type of material (music, movies, etc) so it can be true that we both pirate and purchase at the same time.
You're jumping to conclusions. [snip]
No, there are actual studies like: http://www.scribd.com/doc/93891327/Hammond-File-Sharing-Leak
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 05:35 · Score: 3, Informative

Well, there's this:
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6456/125/
But did you also know that the Conservative Party of Canada lobbied the US government to bump up Canada's position on that list?
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1048993--leaks-show-u-s-swayed-canada-on-copyright-bill

The cables, from the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, even have a policy director for then industry minister Tony Clement suggesting it might help U.S. demands for a tough copyright law if Canada were placed among the worst offenders on an international piracy watch list. Days later, the U.S. placed Canada alongside China and Russia on the list.

Facts are fun!
Re:Title? by ILongForDarkness · 2012-06-06 05:44 · Score: 2

Was the nasty gram from RIAA? I got one of those while working as a sys-admin in Germany. A quick "we are not in the US so suck it" usually is sufficient to deal with those.
Re:Title? by mcgrew · 2012-06-06 06:03 · Score: 2

Piracy = increased sales?
A couple of years ago (I wish I could find the link) a book publisher wanted to know how much piracy was costing him, so he commissioned a study to find out. Since books don't hit the internet for a few weeks after it goes on sale, the researchers watched sales figures from the time of release to a point after the book hit the net. The researchers and publisher were astounded that rather than a drop in sales, there was actually a sales spike! Having it on the net, they hypothesized, generated "buzz".
Cory Doctorow credits his standing as a best seller to the fact that he puts his books on boingboing for free download.
As he points out, nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many artists have starved from obscurity. I believe this is the real reason the RIAA is against the internet -- they have radio, their independant competetion doesn't, and relies on the internet and P2P to escape obscurity.
Especially considering the case of Roger McGuinn. His band, the Byrds, were a huge success in the early sixties, but by 1970 his label condidered him "too old" and by 1980 he was pretty broke, playing in bars. Since the advent of the internet, he's successful again. "[the old outlawed] Napster ressurected my music career," he claims.
There is one group that piracy hurts -- those whose work sucks. These are perhaps the most vehemently anti-piracy folks; they can no longer fool you into buying a shitty album with one good song that gets lots of airplay.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Title? by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 06:30 · Score: 1

It's almost like the question of legalizing marijuana. If left illegal it becomes a gateway drug and connects people with those who distribute drugs that are actually harmful. If legal, most people would never connect with the dealers of harmful drugs. Same with piracy - provide easy access to legit media and most will never visit the pirate bay.
While there are several errors in your post, this one hits the mark. This makes sense, from personal observation.
I am neither here nor there regarding legalizing pot: I'll let others debate that point to death. The fact that media companies are cutting their own throats by driving customers to the pirate sites in droves due to the severe dearth of legal, flexible, timely, cost effective and user-friendly alternatives is something I see quite regularly. Non-techie family, friends and colleagues are often asking me about this 'torrenting' thing, and while some I answer, some I direct to the local store, or help them get an iTunes or Netflix account set up if that meets their needs better.
If the equivalent of iTunes for movies/TV was available (i.e., ***NO DRM***, huge selection, device-agnostic, quick to post new content/episodes, reasonable media pricing, etc.), I could easily see the day when all (well ok, *most*) of the questions about torrenting just fade away.

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Title? by anyGould · 2012-06-06 06:46 · Score: 1

As I understood it, it was from the ISP directly. It listed the files it had detected being shared, along with a bunch of scary text about how she could be liable for this, that, and the other. I never saw the full letter (I did most of the explaining over the phone).
Re:Title? by Dixie_Flatline · 2012-06-06 07:25 · Score: 1

No. Do not promulgate this.
Downloading is 'legal' because there is no law against it. That levy protects you from nothing, as the bills the current Government have shown. If that law gets passed, your levy defense won't hold water.
I've said this in response to every comment like yours for years for exactly this reason. Do not complacently think that you get anything out of the levy other than an empty pocket. Most of that money you pay doesn't even go to the artists that distribute it. In fact, last I heard, it was barely distributed at all.
The levy has been terrible in every measurable sense. It made consumers poorer, it did nothing to compensate the artists that it was supposed to, it gave a false sense to consumers that someone legitimate would get the money at the end of the day, and it confused the issue of whether or not downloading was legal and for what reason.
Re:Title? by kyrio · 2012-06-06 07:29 · Score: 1

Get a better ISP. I have not heard of any ISP in Ontario doing this.
Re:Title? by garbut · 2012-06-06 07:32 · Score: 1

As long as we're pointing out spelling, It's held liable

--
Oh, should I have sugar-coated that?
Re:Title? by kyrio · 2012-06-06 07:34 · Score: 1

No, Canadians are not, and never have been, legally protected to download anything they want. Canadians are protected in downloading any copyrighted music for personal use and, even then, only in limited ways (some could interpret the law to mean that saving it to your internal HDD wouldn't fall into that protection).

The only reason there haven't been any lawsuits is due to the police not giving a shit *right now*. That can change at any time.

Do not spread idiocy.
Re:Title? by dubbreak · 2012-06-06 07:59 · Score: 1

Those are meaningless threats. They are never followed through on the the better ISPs won't even bother forwarding them to the customer. Basically it's more propaganda.

--
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 08:13 · Score: 1

100% correct sir.
Re:Title? by anyGould · 2012-06-06 08:15 · Score: 1

Well, more strictly it's legal because the government and courts can't quite get on the same page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_sharing_in_Canada
has the bloody history, and while the '04-05 ruling isn't valid, it's still a pretty good indicator that Canadian courts don't (currently) consider torrenting illegal in and of itself. (As always, I'm not a lawyer, you probably aren't either, etc, etc, etc.)
I'll agree the levy didn't do much for musicians, but I never expected it to. (My understanding was that they were going to divvy up the money based on album sales or some such jazz, meaning that it threw a few bucks at Celine and that's about it.) But at the time it was considered to open the legal argument that you're not "stealing" music if you were required to pay a levy (read: fine) when you bought the drive. (Again, no-one's argued this in court, so who the hell knows how it'll play out).
But you're correct that the government could get around to passing a stupid law any minute now to appease the Americans. (Never mind that we're the global leader in *buying* their stuff.)
Re:Title? by dubbreak · 2012-06-06 08:21 · Score: 1

Good point. And as the law currently stands we are still allowed to rip our own CDs (something the RIAA and Conservatives were trying to stop), so showing up to court with CDs that contain the tracks in question should be enough of a defence. Actually, since borrowing and copying a work is still OK under fair dealing (to the best of my knowledge.. it's basically the same as taping a friend's LP which was protected), showing up with a burned CD (claiming it was the source) should suffice as well. But don't quote me on that since IANAL.

Of course the various copyright holders are still free to send out threats (something Telus passes on to their customers.. one of the reasons I'm not a customer). It's similar to me sending a letter to someone stating "I think you trespassed on my property, if you do it again I'll sue." When in fact they didn't trespass at all and I have no intents on suing. That hardly irks me. What I really hate is sitting through the "Downloading is theft" ads at the theatre. I paid to watch a film not American propaganda. Aside from the whole "copyright infringement != theft" aspect they are telling me something is illegal that isn't. That is absurd. If I put forth a "No right turns on red lights" campaign claiming making a right turn on a red light is not only illegal but attempted murder the motor vehicle branch or similar would put a stop to it.

--
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 08:38 · Score: 1

(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
. . .
onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
[25]Thus, downloading a song for personal use does not amount to infringement. See Copyright Board's, Private Copying 2003-2004 Decision, 12 December, 2003, at page 20.
ie: As a private citizen you can download whatever you want and it is not infringement.

The mere fact of placing a copy on a shared directory in a computer where that copy can be accessed via a P2P service does not amount to distribution. Before it constitutes distribution, there must be a positive act by the owner of the shared directory, such as sending out the copies or advertising that they are available for copying.
ie: You can share what you want so long as you don't advertise it

[29]Lastly, while the plaintiffs allege that there was secondary infringement contrary to subsection 27(2) [snip] Such evidence of knowledge is a necessary condition for establishing infringement under that section.
ie: the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff to show that the individual knowingly authorized infringement.

It is an infringement of copyright for any person to
(a) sell or rent out,
(b) distribute to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright,
(c) by way of trade distribute, expose or offer for sale or rental, or exhibit in public,
(d) possess for the purpose of doing anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c),
ie: unless you're trying to profit/seriously harm the copyright holder/use the material in a public forum it does not constitute infringement.
The ruling was very clear, Canadians (and that's not to say Canadian organizations) cannot be held liable unless they meet one of three specific criteria which are more commercial in nature. This ruling is why there haven't been any lawsuits. Check you facts before spouting off about idiocy.
Re:Title? by dargon · 2012-06-06 08:39 · Score: 1

You can watch pretty much whatever you want, except Game of Thrones ;)
Re:Title? by dargon · 2012-06-06 08:49 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, the proposed law you're discussing was from before our last election (elections kill any bills on the table). There is a new bill now, Bill C-32, which has some good points, but unfortunately, they are massively outweighed by the bad points, and because we now have a majority government, unless something completely unexpected happens, it will be law whenever they get around to it as the opposition can't simply block it, they can only delay it.
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 08:49 · Score: 1

You are correct you do not have to provide proof of ownership or even have ownership, it's all about the intent to distribute / authorization of infringement.
The ads/restrictions on what operations I can perform/etc are the reason I pirate. I still have a legally purchased DVD collection of over 1200 titles but in each case is a burned copy with that crap stripped out and I previewed just about everyone (either via rental or pirating) prior to purchase.
Re:Title? by anyGould · 2012-06-06 08:56 · Score: 1

Those are meaningless threats. They are never followed through on the the better ISPs won't even bother forwarding them to the customer. Basically it's more propaganda.
Perhaps, but it will still do a good job of scaring people who don't know better. Remember, there's a reason so many people settle out of court on these things.
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 08:57 · Score: 2

Bill C-11 (formerly C-32) strikes a pretty good balance with the exception of the digital lock rules. There will be a constitutional challenge to the digital lock section of the bill and it will most likely be struck down. The rest of the bill is actually fairly well balanced and clarifies exceptions for satire/education/etc which were previously in a legal grey area but generally accepted to be fair use.
Re:Title? by redbeardcanada · 2012-06-06 09:45 · Score: 1

Mod loathing of Telus up.
Re:Title? by Sandman1971 · 2012-06-06 10:06 · Score: 1

That would be because the levy on media is for music only. Movies, games, software, books etc.. do not fall under the blank media levy, and are still very much illegal.

--
It's better to burn out than to fade away
Re:Title? by Xeno+man · 2012-06-06 11:04 · Score: 2

I've gotten a few of those. They are pretty meaningless. What happens is MGM or some studio tracks a popular torrent of some movie they own the rights to. All you can get from a torrent though is the IP address of other people sharing it. You can trace an IP address to the ISP but that is about it, so MGM sends a letter off you all the ISPs saying their users are hosting their content illegally. Now being in Canada and not the US, we play by a different rule book and frankly, ISP don't answer to movie studios. What they will do is send you the user an email saying basically, MGM as notified us that your IP address has been detected for hosting content "movie title here" who owns the rights to said title. We like to remind you that breaking the law is against the law and it is illegal to do illegal things and you should look both ways before crossing the street.

If you actually read the email they send you, there is no threat of action being taken against you by either the movie studio or your ISP, just a scary looking notice.
Re:Title? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 11:47 · Score: 0

ISP gets a nastygram from industry, forwards it to customer, case closed. That's it.
Re:Title? by kyrio · 2012-06-07 10:03 · Score: 1

There haven't been any lawsuits because getting the information from ISPs and getting law enforcement to do their work isn't happening against individuals. It has nothing to do with your take on things that have already been discussed.

Stop spreading your idiocy.
Re:Title? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-08 01:42 · Score: 1

Again, if you'd bothered to read the ruling you'd know that:
1) The ISPs do have an obligation to keep their users information private, however, that does not exempt them from providing that information when a warrant is obtained from a judge
2) The judge recognized that there was no way to tie a specific individual to a specific account or IP address. If they were able to tie someone to a static IP address that does not preclude the use of home routers, guests in the home, etc.
Law enforcement/civil suits simply have no way of providing definitive proof that any individual is linked to a specific case of infringement and even if they do the other tests of "authorization" apply.

Artist really do suck by fluffythedestroyer · 2012-06-06 03:00 · Score: 1

Before you flame, the numbers are there. Artist that makes albums in the end, mostly suck. not completely because they do have some good songs but is 15-25$ a good "reason" to buy the whole album so you can listen to 1 or 2 songs ? I think not. Lots of albums aren't suppose to be released in exception of some songs. Thank god the digital downloads are an option for songs...really.

Re:Artist really do suck by reub2000 · 2012-06-06 03:19 · Score: 2

Err, thank god for artists that can fill an album with 40-50 minutes of music that we want to listen too.

Physical Media Please by acoustix · 2012-06-06 03:02 · Score: 1

I still by CDs and DVD-Audio discs because I want to rip the files into a lossless format. Plus I still listen to entire albums from start to finish. I guess I'm just old school at the ripe old age of 33.

--
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson

Re:Physical Media Please by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:09 · Score: 1

maybe you've just become this man at the ripe age of 33.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/
Re:Physical Media Please by rrohbeck · 2012-06-06 03:22 · Score: 1

Ha, at 33 I still bought CDs too. Now I'm past that

--
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Re:Physical Media Please by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 03:23 · Score: 1

I still by CDs and DVD-Audio discs...
Oh, are you'se the b'y? :)

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Physical Media Please by AngryDeuce · 2012-06-06 03:42 · Score: 1

I listen to entire albums from start to finish, too, and I haven't burned a music CD in at least a year (and that wasn't even for me, but for a friend to listen to in his car)...I'm still 1/4 of the way through the 50 CD spindle I bought back in like 2007. It's been even longer for DVD-R's.
I don't think I'm even going to bother putting an optical drive in my next PC build. Seems like there's no point anymore.
Re:Physical Media Please by cpu6502 · 2012-06-06 04:30 · Score: 1

I buy CDs too (not the individual albums, but the Greatest Hits collection). I rarely listen to them. Buying the disc is simply my method of (1) supporting the artist, engineer, musician, etc and (2) backingup my songs in a non-erasing format.

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Re:Physical Media Please by mcgrew · 2012-06-06 06:46 · Score: 1

You're only in the minority because most people don't have good enough speakers to tell the difference between am MP3 and a WAV. Especially when many of the CDs are mastered so badly.
As to listening to albums from start to finish, that is old school. Note that a lot of the older (from the analog age) music is meant to be listened to an LP side at a time, rather than the whole CD at once. Someone here once complained that "Money" didn't fit the "Dark Side of the Moon" CD, well, it isn't suposed to. There's supposed to be an intermission between sides, "Money" starts act two.
Most Pink Floyd, a lot of Bealtles and Who, and other older rock groups were into the "whole album" (or album side) thing.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Physical Media Please by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 07:58 · Score: 1

I still by CDs and DVD-Audio discs because I want to rip the files into a lossless format. Plus I still listen to entire albums from start to finish. I guess I'm just old school at the ripe old age of 33.
I buy CDs when I go to live performances (I pretty much get one of each they have for sale, if I don't have it already...and sometimes even if I do :). That's all to support artists I love, otherwise why would I be at their shows? Also, I *believe* that a larger cut of live show sales goes to the artist, less (or hopefully none?) to those damned RIAA leeches. (Can anybody verify this for me? I've never been able to find a definitive answer to this question...)
Other than that, I only buy CDs from used music stores or, preferably, direct from the artists if they have an online store. iTunes is my last resort if I can't scratch my itch elsewhere, since I *believe* that those infernal RIAA bloodsuckers get a lower percentage of the cut from iTunes purchases than they do from physical media sales (again, can't find confirmation, so verification or refutation is welcome!)

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Physical Media Please by DarwinSurvivor · 2012-06-06 12:29 · Score: 1

Many independant artists will sell you wav or flac versions of their songs directly off their website. If you want to "preserve" them, BURN them. Or for cheaper, just copy it to 3 different hard drives. CD's are about $0.50/GB ($1 in Canada due to the damn levy), HDD's are about $0.15/GB

RIAA and facts by azalin · 2012-06-06 03:03 · Score: 1

Not that the RIAA and their siblings ever would let facts get in their way. Most of the piracy discussion resolved around protecting existing (but somewhat outdated) business models and increasing the power over the consumer.

So you mean... by Das+Auge · 2012-06-06 03:03 · Score: 2

So you mean that if you respect the privacy of your citizens (Canada has the best privacy laws in the world) and don't treat them like criminals...that they won't generally act like criminals?

I'm freakin' shocked.

Re:So you mean... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:31 · Score: 2, Informative

If Vic Toews has his way all of this will change very soon.
Re:So you mean... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:59 · Score: 0

Don't forget to #tellviceverything.
Re:So you mean... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 12:08 · Score: 0

tell vice very thing?
Re:So you mean... by DarwinSurvivor · 2012-06-06 12:30 · Score: 1

Don't forget Byron, who by the way was FINALY acquited.

I could be wrong... by rumpsummoner · 2012-06-06 03:06 · Score: 1

I was in Edmonton earlier this year for work. I was talking music with some guys that lived there and they hadn't heard of spotify. I went to show it to them an lo-and-behold it didn't work in Canada. I don't know if it was just spotify, but perhaps their sales are high because of a lack of easy alternatives. It would be interesting to know if Canada had more draconian laws against file sharing and streaming, or if it is actually something cultural.

Re:I could be wrong... by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 03:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

We have incredibly lax laws compared to many places; the reason that such services don't tend to work here is simple.
Negotiating the licenses and contracts costs some money
Canada has 1/10th the population of the U.S. so it often isn't worth it.
Netflix, for instance, works perfectly well in Canada but has 1/10th the library of the U.S. version.
Re:I could be wrong... by MonsterTrimble · 2012-06-06 03:15 · Score: 5, Informative

There are Canadian Content rules which specify material which is deemed Canadian Content (% written/produced/performed by a Canadian) must receive x amount of airtime. It's been complained about for a number of years by people in the music industry, however it has given airtime to great artists like The Tragically Hip, Paul Brandt, I Mother Earth, and George Canyon so it's both good and bad.

Personally, I find CBC (especially CBC Music) to be a goldmine for music - free streaming of a pile of concerts, podcasts, you name it.

--
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
Re:I could be wrong... by value_added · 2012-06-06 03:50 · Score: 1

It's been more than a few years since I've been back, so I'll assume that what you say about Canadian content is still valid. And while I agree with your comment, I'll add that there is nothing you or anyone else can do to give me the years I endured listening to Gordon Lightfoot, Anne Murray and Rush on the radio.
NPR on this side of the border isn't half bad. There's college stations just about everywhere that stream fairly good music (KCRW in Los Angeles, as one example), in addition to news and commentary, etc.. I stopped listening to music when the Pixies broke up, so I really don't care one way or the other.
Now, if all those Anne Murray songs would leave my head ... and Celine Dion would stop yelling ...
Re:I could be wrong... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 05:28 · Score: 0

CBC Radio (all stations) still puts me to sleep. Every year or so I give it another try, still the same crud. Not a big fan of their on-air talent. They have decent news and weather, thats about it.
Re:I could be wrong... by MonsterTrimble · 2012-06-06 05:41 · Score: 1

I was refering to their online stuff - Radio 3 & CBC Music. Radio 1 & 2 are pretty dry.

--
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
Re:I could be wrong... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 09:55 · Score: 0

It's been more than a few years since I've been back, so I'll assume that what you say about Canadian content is still valid. And while I agree with your comment, I'll add that there is nothing you or anyone else can do to give me the years I endured listening to Gordon Lightfoot, Anne Murray and Rush on the radio.
NPR on this side of the border isn't half bad. There's college stations just about everywhere that stream fairly good music (KCRW in Los Angeles, as one example), in addition to news and commentary, etc.. I stopped listening to music when the Pixies broke up, so I really don't care one way or the other.
Now, if all those Anne Murray songs would leave my head ... and Celine Dion would stop yelling ...
Beneath it's snowy mantle cold and clean,
The unborn grass lies waiting for its coat to turn to green.
The snowbird sings the song he always sings,
And speaks to me of flowers that will bloom again in spring.
When I was young my heart was young then, too.
And anything that it would tell me, that's the thing that I would do.
But now I feel such emptiness within,
For the thing that I want most in life's the thing that I can't win.
Spread your tiny wings and fly away,
And take the snow back with you where it came from on that day.
The one I love forever is untrue,
And if I could you know that I would fly away with you.
The breeze along the river seems to say,
That he'll only break my heart again should I decide to stay.
So, little snowbird, take me with you when you go,
To that land of gentle breezes where the peaceful waters flow.
Spread your tiny wings and fly away,
And take the snow back with you where it came from on that day.
The one I love forever is untrue,
And if I could you know that I would fly away with you.
Yeah, if I could I know that I would fly away with you.

Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 03:07 · Score: -1, Troll

Nearly all of my friends and family buy their music. Probably because we're not assholes.

There's no excuse not to pay for the multimedia you use these days. I can get any show/song I want on iTunes. If I didn't want to pay $3 an episode or a buck a song, I just wouldn't bloody own it.

Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 03:24 · Score: -1, Troll

Ah slashdot, home of the " Don't you dare copy my source code without my permission but I'm sure as hell not going to pay for what you produce" crowd.
That's okay, you can down mod the truth all you like I have plenty of Karma
Re:Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:40 · Score: 1

Ah the modded down, home of the "I posted inflammatory remark(s) at an unspecified group of people (allowing for a greater audience to message), but the reason I got down modded obviously had nothing to do with it" attitude.
That's ok. You keep telling yourself what you want to hear.
Re:Not surprised by lister+king+of+smeg · 2012-06-06 03:43 · Score: 2

Nearly all of my friends and family buy their music. Probably because we're not assholes.
There's no excuse not to pay for the multimedia you use these days. I can get any show/song I want on iTunes. If I didn't want to pay $3 an episode or a buck a song, I just wouldn't bloody own it.
Unless you use Linux where iTune and Netflix doesn't have a native client. Remember not everyone here likes Apple or Microsoft and some of us want a OS that works they way we want it to, and gasp would also like to be able to consume media. some of us don't want to support monopoly abusing patent trolls.

--
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
Re:Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:44 · Score: 0

I'd mod you up if I had the points. Posts like these keep my misanthropy in check.
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 04:02 · Score: 0

If only there were other options
http://www.hmvdigital.ca/
http://www.puretracks.com/
http://music.scene.ca/
http://ca.7digital.com/
http://mp3caprice.com/
and of course
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Netflix_Instant_Watch_Devices/
Re:Not surprised by O('_')O_Bush · 2012-06-06 04:37 · Score: 1

Delusions of being special, different, and self righteous, anger towards a nameless, faceless opposer that is trying to suppress a "truth" that only you see... I can show you a dozen other paranoid schizophrenics on any given Sunday.

--
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 04:43 · Score: 0

Well the only thing I said was that pirates were assholes. Now aside from the fact that they self-identify with the people who went around stealing and raping, their actions make them assholes too.
There's nothing self-righteous or special about calling people out when they're acting like scum. I respect people who produce things, pirates don't.
Re:Not surprised by bzipitidoo · 2012-06-06 05:09 · Score: 2

If only the issue was so simple! Hammer, meet nail.
We, the people, demand a share in the incredible exposure and savings our technology has brought to music. I don't see the entertainment cartels thanking us, and perhaps more to the point paying us, for the invention of the camera, microphone, speaker, electric guitar, synthesizer, radio, TV, vinyl record, mylar tape, VCR, CD, DVD, huge hard drives, fast consumer grade computers, sophisticated music composition, scoring, recording, mixing and playback software, digital mastering, pitch correction, and most of all, the Internet. No, instead, they have the nerve to whine, complain, snivel, cheat, and even fight and vandalize over the advances that have enriched us all and made possible their industry. They have demonstrated over and over that they are fools who would rather kill their business than move with the times and the technology. Remember that Hollywood itself started as essentially a pirate operation, purposely located in a place distant enough that Broadway could not easily assert their supposed rights. They don't fool us. We know all their talk of rights is really a cover for sheer greed.
We are NOT going to pay 19th century expenses for entertainment!
Copying is NOT stealing! There are many crimes that are not stealing, and many actions that should not be criminal. The world is more complicated than that. We can't draw boundaries around concepts, can't divide the universe into lots and assign ownership, can't dictate every use. No one owns the air we breathe or the water we drink, yet we obviously have an interest. Except for a few private toll roads, we all own the roads. Therefore we use more mechanisms than property rights to manage air, water, roads, and other things. The concept of property rights as applied to real estate or physical goods should not apply to data because, like air and water and roads, they are fundamentally, qualitatively different things.

--
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Re:Not surprised by mcgrew · 2012-06-06 07:57 · Score: 1
You were modded "troll" because of the tone of your comment. Most people don't take kindly to being called "assholes", especially by someone who's 100% wrong. For instance, there's little or no "Don't you dare copy my source code without my permission" here, it's "the GPL protects me from some big corporation taking my code then suing me for using my own code." The pirates are mostly one of the following:
- I can't get the content for six months after everyone's done talking about it and released a spoiler
- I can't get the content at all except from TPB
- I'm not paying for a dead man's work
- The pirate version is superior to the paid version (no unskippable trailors or FBI warnings or lame animated menus to sit through)
- I won't buy a pig in a poke
The studies all show that pirates spend more on the work they pirate than non-pirates do.
I have season 5 of the Big Bang Theory DLing right now. The first four seasons are on overpriced DVDs sitting on my shelf, season 5 will be bought when they get the fucking lead out of their asses and let me pay for the damed thing!
Sorry, buddy, but you're the asshole here. I agree with the moderators. Keep it up and your karma won't be excellent for long.
--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Not surprised by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 08:13 · Score: 1

I can get any show/song I want on iTunes. If I didn't want to pay $3 an episode or a buck a song, I just wouldn't bloody own it.
Trouble is, you don't own the video, you're just renting the ability to watch it on a restricted subset of devices, for as long as the company decides you can.
At least the mp3's you buy are yours, you can do what you like with them: back them up with extreme paranoia, share them with friends, port them to anything that will play mp3 format, edit the metadata for shits and giggles, etc., etc. The video? Not so much.
If (and that's a big 'if') they ever move to DRM-free video services on iTunes, that's when I'll take them seriously. Until then, it's just a big joke, and the joke's on you.

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 08:35 · Score: 0

You are indeed wrong about everything you've just said.
The GPL is giving permission to use code, everyone here was outraged when people took the code (i.e. set top box, routers) and used it without the permissions granted therein.
You are an asshole, I don't care if you like it or not. You're also an idiot.
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 08:39 · Score: 1

Here's the thing:
If you don't like DRM, buy physical copies. Your paranoia that iTunes will suddenly stop letting you play purchased video is unreasonable, and a work around is readily available.
The solution is not piracy.
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 08:40 · Score: 0

First: I pay a hell of a lot less for tv shows on iTunes than I would for cable.
Second: The studios have the right to choose the price, if you don't like it, don't pay it. I don't care that you think it's unfair; don't buy it, but don't pirate it.
Third: I never said pirating was stealing, you didn't even read my post. I said pirates are assholes and that piracy is wrong (it is).
Re:Not surprised by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 09:12 · Score: 1

Here's the thing:
If you don't like DRM, buy physical copies. Your paranoia that iTunes will suddenly stop letting you play purchased video is unreasonable, and a work around is readily available.
The solution is not piracy.
Heh, that one gave me a good chuckle, thanks! "If you don't like DRM, buy physical copies"...indeed :)
What in'ell do you think the MAFIAA is trying to do with their 'digital locks' clauses that they keep trying to push through up here? They are trying to make it illegal for a person to format shift (which in itself is perfectly legal, by the way) if it involves bypassing even the most ineffective DRM 'lock' on the market.
The DRM doesn't work, they know it doesn't work, yet they keep trying to beat that dead horse. All their increasingly draconian DRM does is breaks things for people who don't know how to fix it, you know, the ones who legally purchased it, and legally expect to be able to watch it without hassles? Meanwhile the pirated version can be played on practically device, no crap commercials, no lousy trailers, no bloated DVD screens, etc, etc, etc.
My grandparents keep asking me about Blu-Ray, what it's about, whether they need one. I think they'd enjoy the quality...but. They have no internet connection, and wouldn't know what to do with one if they did, so I would be the first call every time they bought a new Blu Ray and it didn't play for them, or froze up halfway through. Did I mention they have no internet (and barely have cell coverage) where they live? So it's a trip out there to pick it up and bring it back to my place to troubleshoot (6 hours round trip, give or take), then another trip out there to re-install after patching, or removing a patch, or whatever the fuck fixed it until next time. Rinse and repeat.
Why is that considered an acceptable business model?

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Not surprised by bzipitidoo · 2012-06-06 10:46 · Score: 1

I did notice that you didn't actually equate piracy with theft, not in words. However, it seems to me that you agree with the spirit of that thinking. Are you a misanthrope? Do you think most of us are assholes? Because I assure you, most of us are pirates, whether we know it or not. If I pirate something, and make a donation to the artist, am I still an asshole in your book?
But it doesn't matter how wrong anyone thinks piracy is, how much moralizing is done, how many laws are passed against it, or how much DRM they try to force on people. Nothing can stop the sharing. It's easier to regulate sex or drugs than copying, and those are near impossible to control. Most governments have come to their senses, and given up trying to vilify these acts and punish people who commit them. Prohibition was repealed, and other approaches to dealing with alcoholism were tried. Think about that for a moment. There is now ample recognition that drugs are not purely a matter of choice, and not uniformly bad, and severe punishment is not the best way to handle addiction. Morphine is an accepted treatment to ease the pain of those dying from cancer. Used to be that some illnesses were thought a sign of sin or weakness. If you hadn't sinned, you would not have gotten sick. People were shunned and punished for falling ill. That what effectively amounted to a quarantine was of some benefit to everyone else only reinforced the thinking. Today we understand how counterproductive and ridiculous that thinking is, though there are still many people who feel that way about sexually transmitted diseases, and who really think that AIDS is God's way of punishing people for being homosexual or even sympathizing with them, and who might even prefer that we never find a cure though they wouldn't dare admit to such antisocial thoughts. So it will be with piracy, and much faster as piracy is quite clean compared to nasty old sex. Where reality cannot be changed, our expectations and customs must instead change.
There is no point declaring piracy "wrong". I see no reason why we should deny ourselves the benefits of our technology out of some weirdly useless and damaging moral qualms. No reason to wait, no reason to be polite about it. What will you say when society at last fully sanctions copying, and turns to other means of compensating artists, of which there are plenty? It will happen. And your sort will go down in history as part of yet another instance in a long, long list of reactionary, repressive, foolish, wasteful, and ultimately futile movements.

--
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 11:33 · Score: 0

If I pirate something, and make a donation to the artist, am I still an asshole in your book?
Yes. Like it or not, the artist signed on with a record label (likely) for a reason and by depriving the record label of money you are directly harming the artist. For artists that are selling directly, you are directly depriving them of their income.

Nothing can stop the sharing.
Nothing can stop racism, theft, rape, murder, etc. etc. etc. That doesn't make them right.

Prohibition was repealed
Prohibition was censorship, not allowing you to go behind artists back is not censorship, it's stopping you from being a dick.

People were shunned and punished for falling ill.
According to you, everyone is a pirate (which is amusingly false). So I'm not sure how this relates in any way.

here is no point declaring piracy "wrong".
On the contrary, for the some of the same reasons that declaring monopolistic behaviours (unfairly depriving profits) is considered wrong, piracy is wrong.
Basically, you're a moron who is rationalizing an unethical and illegal activity with terrible false analogies and fallacies.
You are the stereotypical pirate, and you are an asshole.
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-06 11:39 · Score: 1

1) That is the U.S. This is about Canada, I am Canadian and I don't care what stupid ass laws you guys allowed to pass.
2) Format shifting is not at discussion here, this is about piracy and format shifting is not piracy
3) You do not, and have never needed to have an internet connection for blu-rays to work at a basic level. There are some added bits that do require it but if your grandparents can't figure out an internet connection somehow I don't think they'll care.
Re:Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 11:52 · Score: 0

They were labeled "pirates" by a bunch of greedy assholes that wanted to make them look evil. Eventually became fed up with constantly having to parrot (har har) that "copyright infringement is not stealing or piracy" and decided just to deal with the term.
Additionally, "pirates" produce a great number of wonderful things. Music, movies, art. A great deal of the good parts of the Internet. You ever watch a DVD on Linux? I certainly hope not! That would make you a rapist! The modern world was built on what you consider piracy. But now a bunch of people with a lot of marketing bucks have convinced you that: "it is, like, totally evil". Congratulations, you're the smartest and noblest person ever to grace Slashdot!
Re:Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 12:39 · Score: 0

Prohibition was censorship, not allowing you to go behind artists back is not censorship
How exactly is prohibition anything like censorship? Do you even understand the topics at hand here? Copyright is the government stopping you from sharing certain things with other people. Which is, actually, a little like censorship. Unlike prohibition which wasn't like censorship at all (it was a ban).
Along with your assertions of how unethical it is to enjoy an artist's work without express permission from them leads me to believe that you are either a lame troll at best or fairly unintelligent with just enough confidence to be dangerous at worst.
Re:Not surprised by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 16:13 · Score: 1

1) That is the U.S. This is about Canada, I am Canadian and I don't care what stupid ass laws you guys allowed to pass.
2) Format shifting is not at discussion here, this is about piracy and format shifting is not piracy
3) You do not, and have never needed to have an internet connection for blu-rays to work at a basic level. There are some added bits that do require it but if your grandparents can't figure out an internet connection somehow I don't think they'll care.
1) I'm just as Canuck as you, and what I am talking about is not what is in effect, but what they are trying to put in effect. We kicked up a fuss about it, but it seems that the digital locks is just not one they're willing to relinquish. I guess it would give their customers too much power, or something.
2) Yees, format shifting is not piracy, but it won't be legal either if these asshats get their way. Like, you can drive your car with insurance and a drivers license, but hey there, we're gonna make it illegal to turn the ignition on. Don't worry, we'll provide this handy tow service...for a fee, of course. For every place you want to go.
3) I call BS on this one. Both of our blu-ray players (yes, I drank the kool-aid) needed firmware updates to be able to play certain movies (the last one that stuck in my head was The Watchmen). They're not Sorney, or some other knockoff brands, they were LG and Samsung respectively, and they were functionally broken right out of the box, thanks to DRM. Every so often, we'd put in a newer BluRay, and sometimes it simply wouldn't play, or (even better) got about halfway through, then freezes up. It got so aggravating that I pretty much quit playing the discs alltogether, and now just format shift and watch that. I'd sell them off, but not to someone I am tech support for...sure, it only happened for a couple of movies on each player, but each time I saw red.
Funny thing is, that has never happened with any DVD player we ever owned...so *maybe* it's more a function of the Blu-Ray format than the DRM...or maybe it's because they 'update' the DRM on their BluRay titles more often, because people get so hot and bothered over all those pixels...
Question for you: Is it 'piracy' for me to rip my parents movies for them? They wouldn't have a hope of being able to do it themselves, yet they appreciate being able to watch their favourite movies while at the lake or on the road with the grandkids.
Another question for you: Is it 'piracy' for my parents to instead download a format-shifted copy of a movie they already own ripped by someone else, instead of getting me to do it for them? How about a standard def copy of a movie or TV show they DVR'd from their fully-paid-for-and-up-to-date cable TV service? Format shifting is not illegal, but the technological barriers imposed by DRM locks and general asshattery, while laughable to you and me, are often insurmountable to them.

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Not surprised by bzipitidoo · 2012-06-06 16:50 · Score: 1

Nothing can stop racism, theft, rape, murder, etc. etc. etc.
We as a society agree that theft, rape, and murder cause harm and therefore are crimes. Racism is more difficult to handle, because it can be hard to detect, and hard to call, so we don't criminalize it in all cases, but we agree it is immoral, and that it harms people. As for monopolies, you have it backwards. Copyrights are monopolies, and both are bad!
Sharing should not be a crime not only because it can't be stopped. Sharing should also not be a crime because there is no harm done, and a lot of good, except maybe to a badly broken business model that needs to die anyway. Even for those who live by the broken business model of selling copies, sharing does not always harm them. It is pretty clear that like education, sharing is a net benefit to society.
I hope you realize that Canada doesn't have piracy. Sharing is legal, and artists are compensated through a number of mechanisms, including a levy on optical media. That the entertainment cartels disagree does not change this.

According to you, everyone is a pirate
It's not me saying that, it's Big Media. According to the insanely extreme copyright laws Big Media has pushed through, just about everyone is a pirate. If copyright is extended, removing works from the public domain, are you supposed to destroy any copies you have of those works if you would not be a pirate? Yes! If you play a recording that is under copyright, and your neighbor overhears, you and your neighbor are both pirates. If you look at a website and it plays a copyrighted jingle without permission from the owners, you'd think only the site owners are guilty of infringement. But you are also guilty. If you download something you thought was free, but it contains a copyrighted work, you are a pirate. Doesn't matter that you didn't know. Ignorance is no excuse!

you're ... rationalizing an unethical and illegal activity with terrible false analogies and fallacies.
A growing majority of people do not agree with you about any of that. We, the people, are the supreme law. These activities are legal and ethical if we decide they are. Eventually, in a generation or 2, we will so decide. As for "terrible" analogies, I doubt you can explain why you think so in a way that will convince any fair minded person. You didn't even try.

You are the stereotypical pirate, and you are an asshole.
A person ought to know better than to resort to such name calling and unproven accusations. You do not know whether I am a pirate. And I'm not going to say one way or the other. Why should I? You wouldn't believe any denial anyway. But I will say I don't much bother with TV anymore, and it's not because I can download all the shows I want to watch, it's because there aren't any shows I really care to watch. Same with movies. Nor do I bother pirating games. There is plenty of good stuff that's freely available, even for the free OS I use. As for books and music, the public library and radio are adequate.

--
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Re:Not surprised by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 17:12 · Score: 1

I have season 5 of the Big Bang Theory DLing right now. The first four seasons are on overpriced DVDs sitting on my shelf, season 5 will be bought when they get the fucking lead out of their asses and let me pay for the damed thing!
You want frustration? Try getting ahold of the Discovery show "How it's Made" :) Seasons 1 through 3 are on the shelf, and I see now that they finally released season 4. Trouble is, the show is in it's 19th season...
For more years than I care to admit, I patiently recorded, cleaned up, cataloged and stored each new episode, filling in gaps in previous seasons by recording every rerun and deleting those I already had. We had them all nice and tidy, so we could watch pretty much any episode we liked, whenever we liked...when I lost it all, due to placing too much trust in raid 5 (I know, I know...now).
Thank goodness I am not the only rabid fan out there, though. Seasons 4 through 17 are safely ensconced in our media center, patiently awaiting upgrade to "ripped from proper DVD" status. Looks like season 4 doesn't have long to wait...I honestly have no idea when their fellow seasons can say the same...

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Not surprised by Altrag · 2012-06-06 17:21 · Score: 1

I don't see the entertainment cartels thanking us, and perhaps more to the point paying us, for the invention of the camera, microphone, speaker, electric guitar, synthesizer, radio, TV, vinyl record, mylar tape, VCR, CD, DVD, huge hard drives, fast consumer grade computers, sophisticated music composition, scoring, recording, mixing and playback software, digital mastering, pitch correction, and most of all, the Internet.
Err what? I'm fairly sure that they "thank" the producers of all of those things in the form of equipment costs and licensing fees on a regular basis.
Or are you trying to imply that you personally invented digital mastering and should be compensated?
"The internet" is the closest thing to being created by "the people" in the sense that it started out as an army project way back in the day, but its long since been taken over by private interests, both in the equipment and the communications aspects.
I'm not a fan of the RIAA but this "argument" is just silly.
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-07 01:43 · Score: 1

Thank you for putting on public record how stupid you are.
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-07 01:51 · Score: 1

Well as I said, format shifting is not piracy. So no, you doing it for someone else is not piracy (assuming you don't then take a copy for yourself).
As to downloading a copy after you own it, that's a bit of a grey area and here's why: You aren't doing anything wrong (unethical) by grabbing a copy of something you've already paid for. The person sharing most certainly is. Of course if there was a system in place to ensure you'd bought a copy before you could download then that'd be okay... But that would be that terrible evil DRM monster creeping in again wouldn't it?
Re:Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-07 05:34 · Score: 0

I respect people who produce things
Then there are many, many people who you don't "respect." But, really, why would someone care about being respected by you? All you do is go around making hasty generalizations and attacking faceless groups of people with inflammatory remarks. If you think that's going to be applauded, or that you're stating anything other than your own opinion, you are sadly mistaken.
Re:Not surprised by cheekyjohnson · 2012-06-07 05:36 · Score: 1

everyone here was outraged when people took the code
"everyone"? Interesting generalization. Some people view the GPL as a necessity as long as copyright exists, however. That doesn't mean they want copyright as a whole to exist, though.

You are an asshole, I don't care if you like it or not. You're also an idiot.
You're a stupid-head, I don't care if you like it or not. You're also an idiot. There, you're defeated!

--
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Re:Not surprised by CCarrot · 2012-06-08 05:10 · Score: 1

Well as I said, format shifting is not piracy. So no, you doing it for someone else is not piracy (assuming you don't then take a copy for yourself).
As to downloading a copy after you own it, that's a bit of a grey area and here's why: You aren't doing anything wrong (unethical) by grabbing a copy of something you've already paid for. The person sharing most certainly is. Of course if there was a system in place to ensure you'd bought a copy before you could download then that'd be okay... But that would be that terrible evil DRM monster creeping in again wouldn't it?
But there is a simple fix to this seemingly insurmountable dilemma...provide studio-rendered DRM-free digital copies for every DVD/BluRay (not this device-locked crap they try to foist off on people) *OR* provide (free of charge) some sort of user-friendly software to help the buyer create their own digital copies, like the preponderance of music rippers available. (I know, user-friendly DVD and BluRay ripping software is readily available, but the studios hate it, and fight against it every chance they get).
To protect their interests, they could incorporate a unique purchase/encoding code in the digital copy. If they then see that digital copy in the wild, they'll know where it came from and that would give them an investigative lead if they chose to track down the person who 'leaked' it. If many 'leaks' seem to be coming from one purchaser, or encoded on one computer, then I'm sure they would want to have a serious chat with that person...as long as they don't get lazy and assume that 83yo Norma Jones is the culprit, just because the copies were created on the laptop that her grandkid helpfully bought for her so she could check her emails. They'd still have to, you know, investigate, but it gives them a starting point at least.
Think about it. Suddenly people could use the media they purchased how they like, even sharing their library with close friends and family, while still protecting the interests of the copyright holders. Hell, their profits should see a huge boost from dropping the DRM research alone...not to mention the boost in sales of digital copies, once they remove the bullshit and make them accessible (as long as they are suitably priced...i.e., not charging physical copy prices for an electronic copy, but keeping the pricing more in line with that on iTunes). Sure, you'll have copies show up with the purchase code stripped, but that just gives them more legal muscle to prosecute the perpetrators when they do track it back to ground zero, like removing or swapping the VIN on a vehicle.
Of course, that would require that they actually place some trust in their customers, instead of assuming that we are all greedy, thieving shitheads, as seems to be their preference. They'd rather fight tooth and nail to preserve their outdated monopoly on how and where their customers enjoy their products. It's nice to see that the sheeple are starting to wake up and fight against this, even if it's just by protesting the draconian legislation they keep trying to shove down our throats...

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Not surprised by AdrianKemp · 2012-06-09 14:38 · Score: 1

I agree with almost everything you've just said. Two issues:
1) They can charge the same price for physical/electronic if they choose. Look no further than WoW/MS Points/PSN points/Gift Cards/etc.etc.etc. for examples of companies eating the physical distribution costs on a physical copy of something (MS Gold cards are actually cheaper physical last I checked). Whether or not they should is a question for the market to decide, but it's their product, their pricing.
2) You mention sharing with family and friends, since the method of DRM you suggest allows the file to be played in multiple locations simultaneously I feel like your version of "sharing" here is in fact pirating. I could be wrong, since you aren't explicit... but sending my friend a copy of a digital movie is no different/no more ethical than copying a DVD and giving it to him.
I don't like DRM either, I don't mind the conceptual nature of it but execution has historical been awful. However if I actually felt that DRM was interfering with my ability to use the product I would 1) write an email and a letter, and 2) not buy it. I would not pirate it.

Lobbyist is just another word for Liar by cpu6502 · 2012-06-06 03:08 · Score: 1

"The Canadian music market is being destroyed by downloads!" (And oh by they way we're the global leader in sales.)

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"

Almost any artist can bypass any publisher by nhat11 · 2012-06-06 03:09 · Score: 0

and just hire someone to make a website and some server space and just sell their music/movie/whatever online now. The options for artists are great now.

Re:Almost any artist can bypass any publisher by PktLoss · 2012-06-06 03:39 · Score: 1

Interesting take on that availability: http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/04/15/meet-the-new-boss-worse-than-the-old-boss-full-post/

--
paul reinheimer

Let's face it by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:09 · Score: 0

All those anti-file sharing lawsuits are raking in the moolah. Up to $750,000 in damages per song! is it any wonder profits are skyrocketing?

Oh look, egg on our face.

Cold by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:09 · Score: 0

Stay inside where it's warm and have your music delivered or go out? I'll bet Canada is a global leader in pizza deliveries too ;)

Too Polite by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:12 · Score: 1

Canadians are just too nice to pirate.

Piracy causes sales by Slippery_Hank · 2012-06-06 03:13 · Score: 1

We clearly have a correlation between high rates of piracy and high online music sales. Since piracy has been around much longer than 'legal' music downloads, and the future cannot cause the past , the only logical conclusion is that piracy causes online sales.

Re:Piracy causes sales by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 06:55 · Score: 0

Or that there is no causal relationship at all between piracy and sales.

So they by rossdee · 2012-06-06 03:16 · Score: 1

Pay to download the music and they pay a surcharge on the media to burn it to.

BTW Maybe people in the rest of the world would pirate less if there were legal ways to download and pay, I don't think Amazon's mp3 store is accessible in other countries.

Re:So they by kyrio · 2012-06-06 07:48 · Score: 1

Nobody* is burning music to disc any longer. I'm not sure if they still have a levy on music players, but that's where all* of the tracks are going. Either way, the levy makes it legal* to download copyrighted music without paying for it. Let's hope it stays that way (legal*).

Epic fail by vlm · 2012-06-06 03:17 · Score: 2

I predict a epic fail. Lots of discussion about morality and ethics of downloading / sharing by country, no discussion about availability in the marketplace.

A lot more chopsticks are sold in .jp and .cn than in .se or .fr. That doesn't mean the people in .jp rarely pirate chopsticks and everyone in .fr prints stolen 3-d printer copies of chopsticks or relies on gray market imported chopsticks. I'm guessing that most of the online available music appeals to .us and by extension (since their govt is just a lapdog of the us, etc etc) the music appeals to .ca. On the other hand Garth Brooks and the Dixie Chix don't sell so well in Paris.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger

Maybe this'll get results... by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 03:18 · Score: 2

Well now, perhaps studies like this will help motivate the other large US music sellers (Amazon, Google) to get off their collective asses and start porting their services to Canada. Have been (not so) patiently waiting for this for, what, five years now?

I am no fan of Apple, but right now that's the only large-scale digital music purchase option available to Canada...at least they provide iTunes cards so I don't have to, you know, enter any real personal information for an iTunes account. The interface and bloatiness still sucks, though, and I'd hop on Amazon or Google in a heartbeat (well, once my current credits are used up).

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant

Re:Maybe this'll get results... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 05:25 · Score: 0

Amazon ate one of my favourite music sellers, Aimestreet, that used to sell to Canada. I miss their pricing model where prices decay over time, but go up again by a penny for every X buys. You could also earn (a little) money if you recommended tracks and they got a lot of buys.
eMusic is still okay. Monthly fee, but you keep the tracks even if you unsubscribe. There's also Puretracks. And then the niche sellers, like Beatport for electronic or cdbaby for smaller bands.
To be honest though, the US options are still better. I have a US credit card and Amazon MP3 is pretty good. So is Spotify. I like it for its radio at home and offline cached copies of songs for the subway. If any of the albums I really like go on sale for a couple bucks I snag them. I expect I'll want to cancel my Spotify account one day, just like I did my eMusic account.
Re:Maybe this'll get results... by EvilBudMan · 2012-06-06 06:46 · Score: 1

What about DirecTV?
Re:Maybe this'll get results... by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 07:31 · Score: 1

What about DirecTV?
?
a) DirecTV is a satellite TV provider, not anything you can actually purchase content from, just rent it. And,
b) it's apparently not available in Canada, according to their own website.

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Maybe this'll get results... by EvilBudMan · 2012-06-06 07:51 · Score: 1

I hear the Canadians have hacked it whilst smoking something called BC Bub or Club or something.
Re:Maybe this'll get results... by CCarrot · 2012-06-06 09:26 · Score: 1

I hear the Canadians have hacked it whilst smoking something called BC Bub or Club or something.
Oh, well, possibly, I wouldn't know.
I'm too busy griping about the lack of legal alternatives to iTunes, ones with widely varied selections and the great ease-of-use factor, like Amazon or Google Music.
Puretracks is okay, with a pretty decent selection, but the convenience factor just isn't there yet, like it is (for 'mericans at least) with Amazon or Google. If Puretracks had an app that let me browse and buy on my phone...

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
Re:Maybe this'll get results... by EvilBudMan · 2012-06-07 01:02 · Score: 1

I dunno too much about iPhones, but can't you jailbreak one of those and/or root an Android and get what you want? If not I think there are some bittorent clients for Android at least. I'm pretty sure there is also a proxy for rooted Androids as well since there isn't legal alternatives. I normally buy the CD and go from there anyhow. It just seems like a better deal.
If you fight piracy that hard then all you will have are pirates.
Re:Maybe this'll get results... by CCarrot · 2012-06-07 03:06 · Score: 1

I dunno too much about iPhones, but can't you jailbreak one of those and/or root an Android and get what you want? If not I think there are some bittorent clients for Android at least. I'm pretty sure there is also a proxy for rooted Androids as well since there isn't legal alternatives. I normally buy the CD and go from there anyhow. It just seems like a better deal.
If you fight piracy that hard then all you will have are pirates.
It's more like, I need an american address and credit card to be able to purchase stuff from them, even if I proxy the connection. Which isn't impossible, just a hoop I refuse to jump through. If they scorn my money that much, then fine. I'll buy from the vendors who acknowledge Canada instead.

--
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant

*Mafioso voice, holding cigar, oak-panelled room* by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-06-06 03:19 · Score: 1

Canada, Canada... I don't think that we properly understand each other.

It's not about the money anymore, it's too late for your damn sales figures. It's about respect.

You always were one of our top earners, kid; but that wasn't good enough for you. You had to go mouthing off against the MAFIAA, against the family...

Must be because of by slazzy · 2012-06-06 03:20 · Score: 1

Must be because of our strong Canadian laws against piracy and strict enforcement against - oh wait...

--
Website Just Down For Me? Find out

Say goodbye to CD tax? by rrossman2 · 2012-06-06 03:23 · Score: 2

Since apparently the legit digital market is growing leaps and bounds, would it be a good time to suggest repealing any CD-R and SD type card taxes the CRIA managed to get passed into law? It only seems fair and makes sense to me.

Re:Say goodbye to CD tax? by PktLoss · 2012-06-06 03:40 · Score: 2

+1
Reference: http://www.cpcc.ca/en/the-cpcc/private-copying-tariff

--
paul reinheimer
Re:Say goodbye to CD tax? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:47 · Score: 0

Just curious...is there a flourishing blackmarket for blank CDs & SDs & flash drives?
[OPPORTUNITY!]
Re:Say goodbye to CD tax? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:12 · Score: 1

Hell No. Then that opens the floodgates to turn our lovely land into the USA's RIAA pirate witchhunt. That levy is what allows for downloading, and holds off those dogs of war.
Re:Say goodbye to CD tax? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 05:08 · Score: 0

Keep watching. Eventually, we'll be paying that surtax and be subject to the same harassing lawsuits as the US consumers. That's what bill C-11, if I remember correctly, is all about. Most people don't notice bill C-11 because everyone's distracted by bill C-30 and now the budget bill C-38. Now there's a bit of work. Everything they couldn't pass as a separate bill is being lumped into what is supposed to be the Canadian Budget for the next year.
Re:Say goodbye to CD tax? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 05:49 · Score: 1

C-11 is dead. C-32 is the new version of it and with the exception of the digital lock rules isn't that bad. The great thing is that the digital lock rules are likely to be constitutionally impermissible and the "authorization of infringement" ruling will still apply so nothing will really change.
Re:Say goodbye to CD tax? by JMJimmy · 2012-06-06 05:59 · Score: 1

oops... got C-11 and C-32 backwards. My bad!

Thus we need DMCA-style Bill C-32? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:25 · Score: 0

RIAA/MPAA: Obviously the current copyright law isn't working, and we need DMCA-style laws to protect the media industry and artists, and piracy is rampant in Canada, so we'll lobby to put them on piracy watch lists. Oh, wait, digital sales are fine under the existing law, and are in fact better than the USA where the DMCA originated? Uh, um, well, just imagine how much more we would make on top of that if there wasn't piracy.

We are so gullible. Greedy media companies and our silly governments willing to cave in to them. They don't even care about the data. It makes you wonder why our copyright law needs to be "fixed" at all.

h_omo by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:27 · Score: -1

po5ts. D0e to the

I'm a Canadian, and I do buy stuff, yes. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:35 · Score: 0

I'm a Canadian, and I often buy music from Beatport.

Why? Beatport runs very counter to big evil record companies, and it's also pretty much the only way to get the freshest, cutting edge dance music. Much of the good stuff is just too new and/or obscure to make it onto large p2p networks... you have to be in the scene circles. Not only that, but Beatport actually pays artists a fair percentage without ridiculous recording contracts.

I will never, ever purchase content from Big Media, because I don't see it as actually helping artists and the vast majority of big name music is horribly stale crap anyway. Beatport DOES support artists AND has much better music!

Doing something right by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:35 · Score: 0

Just from passing knowledge of skimming various articles, it appears Canada has a well balanced set of laws on the books. Stealing is illegal, but the punishment fits the crime.

Secondly sharing appears to work as a music discovery service, much like radio was back when there was actually music being played.

Lol - Noobs! by bazorg · 2012-06-06 03:39 · Score: 1

Lol - Noobs.

That's all.

We listen for free and buy the product we like! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:44 · Score: 0

It's not hard. Canadians listen to the music for free, then buy the product that we like. This is how it should be. What's the big deal?

so lets pass a stupid copyright law by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:48 · Score: 0

ya one 84-90% of canada dont want , i swear im a punch a conservative if any of you wish to admit it you are.

Re:so lets pass a stupid copyright law by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:01 · Score: 0

People who identify as "conservative" don't necessarily support King Stevo and his corporate cronies. Some of them want actual fiscal conservatism without the hiding behind closed doors and anti-fact holy ideologies.
Sadly, there is no good party for these people to vote for.

Why we buy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:49 · Score: 0

I think its because we have no music or video stores anymore. We cheered when Rogers Video and Blockbuster gtfo, Im pretty sure we cheered too when the music giants packed up and leftyears ago too. I mean , u could still goto walmart and buy a disc, but, really? who buys discs anymore?who wants to goto walmart for that matter. jeez.

Nice country list ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:49 · Score: 0

"Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden" ... these are either small contries (Austria, Croatia, Belgium, ...) or ones that are near bancrupcy (Greece, Spain), so not really surprising.

Re:Nice country list ... by MachDelta · 2012-06-06 05:11 · Score: 1

Except for France, which is twice Canada's size in population...
Re:Nice country list ... by Gravitron+5000 · 2012-06-06 05:27 · Score: 1

Here's a list of population and GDP pulled from wikipedia against the entire country list:
Austria 8,452,835 $419,243
Belgium 10,951,266 $513,396
Croatia 4,290,612 $63,842
Finland 5,410,550 $266,553
France 65,350,000 $2,776,324
Greece 10,787,690 $303,065
Ireland 4,588,252 $217,669
The Netherlands 16,736,075 $840,433
Portugal 10,561,614 $238,880
Spain 46,185,697 $1,493,513
Sweden 9,495,113 $538,237
Total: 192,809,704 $7,671,155
vs.
Canada 34,819,500 $1,736,869

No Spotify = no progress. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 03:54 · Score: 0

That's because we don't have Spotify in Canada. I stopped buying music the day I downloaded Spotify (I have a European credit card). This is not progress... this is backwards.

Why I pay. by steveaustin1971 · 2012-06-06 03:56 · Score: 1

I download a LOT of music. When I find a band or artist I like, I tend to purchase the songs I like because its not very expensive and I just feel better paying for their work if I think it is good. I know that a lot of the time they really don't get much from the sale, but I hope that the sales at least help encourage the artists in their careers. I still download from alternative sources, mostly if I want to check out some new music, but if I find stuff I like I am pretty likely to go purchase some tracks.

Canadien pirates by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:10 · Score: 0

Hollywood will label Canadians pirates no matter what. Even dispite the fact that you can't be a pirate if you live in a igloo.
(Posting from Canada)

Re:Canadien pirates by Gravitron+5000 · 2012-06-06 05:32 · Score: 1

We humbly disagree

Well two things. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:12 · Score: 0

Maybe Im wrong on this because Im not canadian but as I know they dont have the restrictions against copy protection that say we do in the US which means they can pirate more stuff without worry of being sued for everything they have just beause they want to say watch a movie or a tv show that they cant anywhere else except via piracy, or maybe they are tired of paying a lot of money for terrible music or bad movies and want to sample them first instead of paying way to much for a movie or a album. So they might pirate stuff and then go buy it. If you get on youtube and seach for "neil gaiman piracy" there is a video on there where he explains how so called piracy increased his book sales and new audiences found they liked his work that normally didnt know about him before. His book/comic book sales increased when piracy became a big thing.

Secondly canada isnt that populated compared to the majority of other modernized countries where broadband and computer use is used by the vast majority of the populace. Canada probablly has the 10th of the population compared to the US so the fact they pirate less isnt surprising. Thats like saying that country X has a lower crime rate than country Y when country X has a population of 25.000 people where country Y has a population of 150,000 people of course there will be less crime because there is a lot less people.

You act like... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:15 · Score: 0

...you've never heard that SINGLES used to be released in the analog era.

Re:You act like... by fluffythedestroyer · 2012-06-06 04:50 · Score: 1

ya and you payed the big price too.

You forgot to by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:22 · Score: 0

add Luxembourg and New Sealand?

Hum. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 04:55 · Score: 0

Perhaps Canada simply doesn't have music even worth pirating?
That Bieber failure came from there, after all.

Piracy = Profit by loimprevisto · 2012-06-06 04:57 · Score: 1

I don't understand the headline.

How does the fact that Canada is a global leader in music sales imply that they are not a "pirate nation"? Has any credible study shown that one would expect that to be the case? The studies and surveys that come to mind all indicate that those who pirate the most media also spend the most...

--
Much Madness is divinest Sense --
To a discerning Eye --
Much Sense -- the starkest Madness

Source by sociocapitalist · 2012-06-06 04:58 · Score: 1

Well..of course they are! After all...someone has to buy it to be able to put it on the net for everyone else to download!!

--
blindly antisocialist = antisocial

A note about the comments and summary by brit74 · 2012-06-06 05:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

When I first read the summary, a red flag went off for me - and it was the fact that we're *only* talking about digital sales - and even worse, the summary talks about one subcategory of digital sales: "single track downloads". The summary seems to have ignored physical sales of music and whole album digital sales. My first thought was to question how the Canadian balance of physical to digital sales differed from other nations.

Also, talking about how the Candian digital sales is growing faster (percentage-wise) than the US could also be a red herring if the Canadian market for digital sales was very low five years ago. (Example: if you start with 10,000 digital sales per year five years ago, you can get 100% growth each year and still have lower overall digital sales than a country that was selling 1,000,000 sales five years ago and had 10% growth each year.) In fact, the MichaelGeist information confirms that this is what happened - i.e. that the Canadians digital sales numbers started much lower - when he says "Canada seems likely to pass the U.S. on per capita single track downloads in about 18 months". So, the chart Michael Geist produces showing six years of faster-than-US sales growth in "single track downloads" is really a chart showing that Canada is still playing catch-up. Also, I wonder how "single track downloads" differs from "digital sales" in general.

According to the Norway sample data (http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/RIN-samplepage-2012.pdf), digital sales account for 45% of total revenue and "single track downloads" accounts for 18% of digital sales. This means in Norway that "single track downloads" accounts for only 8.1% of revenue. This also raises a red-flag for me because it makes me think that "single track downloads" was a subcategory that Geist could seize on to paint a rosy picture, even if the total picture was different.

I've also noticed that a lot of comments on the Slashdot thread seem to think we're talking about "total sales" when were talking only about one component of music sales: "digital music sales" or "single track downloads".

As much as I hate when the music industry spins numbers (for example, assuming that one act of piracy equals one lost sale to calculate the amount of money lost to piracy), we should also acknowledge that the pro-piracy crowd spins their numbers as well. I'd look at the actual numbers, but the entire report is only available if you pay.

ha by ILongForDarkness · 2012-06-06 05:40 · Score: 1

I'd like to know who. I literally do not no a single person that has bought a signal song electronically. At the moment I have ~20k songs in my iTunes collection and I'm a relatively light user compared to my friends. Rot in hell CRIA.

Not surprising by daq+man · 2012-06-06 05:58 · Score: 1

It's so miserable dark and cold for half the year that there's nothing else to do in Canada.

We'll by EvilBudMan · 2012-06-06 06:44 · Score: 1

It has to do with all that stuff they smoke up there.

Must be mostly from iTunes by SeaFox · 2012-06-06 07:00 · Score: 1

I was quite surprised when I learned last month that Amazon doesn't have an MP3 store for Canada.

The only ones surprised are the RIAA by msobkow · 2012-06-06 07:12 · Score: 1

Canada does not have the same copyright laws as the US. We have a right to preview media. We use downloads to do that instead of going to stores.

And surprise, surprise: The more media you preview, the more you're likely to buy.

But the RIAA and MPAA will keep screaming about "lost sales" until they finally die an ignoble death rather than face up to the fact that they should encourage previewing/piracy to boost sales, not scream and cry about it like spoiled children.

--
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.

What gets me incensed is that the discussion of this subject is so circumscribed.
1). Why does copyright even exist?
2) Why is the term of copyright so long?
3). Why are governments rather than the injured party required to pay the cost of prosecution?
Why aren't these questions asked?

Answers commonly given:
(1) seems to be "so that the poor struggling artist ban be rewarded for his/her work". Come again? There are other (traditional) ways for artists to obtain payment. And between the Internet & PayPal, who needs a distribution network?
(2). Term of copyright so long? Poor struggling artist again? No. Pure greed. Once it took months or years to print, distribute artwork media. And there were fewer customers, meaning the time to recover investment was much longer than now.
(3). Why government assistance in prosecution? It's called corruption (no, sorry, regulatory capture by political contributions).

I ask the question. Why not repeal copyright? Or at the very least, weaken the value by shortening the term, and making the copyright owner prosecute, and only recover loss, not damages?

It's the economy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 08:13 · Score: 0

An important extra point that everyone is skipping is our economy is a hell of a lot better than everyone else's. We did not have the banking crisis and we'd already addressed our debt problem. We're nowhere near as badly off as anyone else right now, and hence still have the disposable income for treat-items like tunes.

It's apples and oranges until that's factored in. Nearly everyone else is locked into a bad level of austerity and recession right now.

Moose antlers by bryan1945 · 2012-06-06 10:18 · Score: 1

They make the Wi-fi connections easier.

--
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.

Not even. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-06 10:30 · Score: 0

Netflix has 1/10th of the content in Canada, not because of the size. It is a result of Bell and Rogers etc owning the rights to the content in Canada and not being willing to allow Netflix to license it.

Liars by Fuck_this_place · 2012-06-06 10:46 · Score: 1

Wait, you mean that an American based company is reprehensible enough to lie to the whole world to merely enrich itself? Say it's not so!

I CAME ERE FORE by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-07 05:03 · Score: 0

DE CANADIAN JOKES

Yar? by DarthVain · 2012-06-08 07:36 · Score: 1

We be legally downloadin' yer music?

Yar, we never get to pillage anymore... :(

Seriously what country has more beards and coastline than Canada? We must be pirates!

Slashdot Mirror

Canada No Pirate Nation: Global Leader In Music Download Sales

179 comments