Slashdot Mirror


Canadian IP Lobby Calls For ACTA, SOPA & Warrantless Search

An anonymous reader writes "The Canadian intellectual property's lead lobby group, the Canadian IP Council (which represent the music, movie, software and pharma industries) released a new policy document (PDF) yesterday that identifies its legislative priorities for the coming years. Anyone hoping that the SOPA protests, the European backlash against ACTA, and the imminent passage of Canadian copyright reform might moderate the lobby group demands will be sorely disappointed. Michael Geist says it is the most extremist IP policy document ever released in Canada, calling for the implementation of ACTA, SOPA-style rules including website blocking and stopping search queries from resolving, liability for advertisers and payment companies, massive surveillance at the border and through delivery channels including searching through individual packages without court oversight, and spending hundreds of millions of tax dollars on private enforcement." Reader Bloozguy adds more legislative bad news for Canadians: Bill C30, the country's much-maligned warrantless internet surveillance bill, is coming back with new provisions that would give the U.S. government access to Canadian citizens' private data.

92 of 129 comments (clear)

  1. WTF?!!? by zero.kalvin · · Score: 5, Funny

    The only reaction I have if Fuck you! Why don't they install chips in our asses as well to see if we accidentally farted a theme song! What a bunch of idiots!

    1. Re:WTF?!!? by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 2

      Do NOT give them any new ideas. No, seriously.

      And on the same topic, this kind of crap is exactly why there needs to be some sort of penalty for lobbying for laws that are so far away from any sort of humanitarian ideal, social contract or even basic free market concept. Want to propose a law in parliament that calls for the eating of babies? Fine, but if it doesn't pass, your baby is the only one that gets eaten. Want to propose draconian IP restrictions? Fine, but if it fails, your IP is permanently forfeited. Want to argue for some new taxes? Fine, but if it fails, your ass is the only one that gets taxed.

      Yes, new laws will basically only get created if everyone KNOWS that they will pass with acclamation. That's the point. There are far too many laws on the books anyway.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    2. Re:WTF?!!? by gman003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wouldn't a better idea be just *not* *electing* baby-eaters to Parliament?

    3. Re:WTF?!!? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      no, wrong design paradigm. the baby-eaters WILL come. count on it. expect it.

      what we should do, as intelligent beings aware of our own faults, is to architect a system where the baby-eaters do not last long in positions of power. its hard to know if they'll be baby-eaters beforehand but once they show their cards, they should be ousted and actually prohibited from working in public 'service'.

      strong? ok, jail them.

      but define a system that punishes bad behavior. IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY. I think we stopped doing that and we let those in power get free passes, one after another.

      even the recall election didn't work; the system is so corrupt that even trying to pull back a bad guy did not yield the correct result.

      I advocate not following bad laws, as a start. but, we already do that, don't we?

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re:WTF?!!? by s.petry · · Score: 2

      Canada is just as corrupt as the US, and Mexico. This is a frightening state of affairs. All 3 of us have straw men leading that are trained liars. That is their job, to tell bold faced lies with a straight face.

      As a first step, each of us needs to figure out a way to rid ourselves of the media monopolies that are dumping bullshit on the populace. Unfortunately, since recalls and legal channels are failing I'm at a loss for how to accomplish this without some type of revolution. It does make one think, is the revolution in the plans for the powers holding the straw men in office?

      Of course if we can get the media back from them, we could begin to investigate and call more people to action. It's a really fucked up situation at the moment (sorry, there is no pleasant way to say how bad things really are)

      If you are clueless, spend some time reading independent (not corporate [nbc/abc/cbs/fox]) news. Since it may take a long time for you to get it, search out 'WYBM", "The Obama Deception", "911 Truth" on Youtube for starters. Check the facts they present. Read the wiki page for fallacy and start learning the rhetoric game they have been playing against you. I think the most important thing to do, is to wake other people up to what has been going on.

      And shit, I'm late to the party. John Lennon and George Carlin had it figured out a long time ago, Alex Jones has been trying to expose this shit for over a decade.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    5. Re:WTF?!!? by hazah · · Score: 1

      You say this like there is a choice. So choose. Option 1 = turd sandwich. Option 2 = douche bag. Choose.

    6. Re:WTF?!!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      People HATE to think it has actually gotten this bad. They absolutely refuse to accept that things could be this way. They will cry out that Alex Jones is a nut, that 911 was clean and transparent, that this IP bullshit is "just business" and that there is no endgame.

      It is really unfortunate to see people who laud intelligence and logic become so utterly blinded. Mark my words, we will NOT recover from this. There IS NO "better time" ahead. It is a downhill slalom right into the pit.

    7. Re:WTF?!!? by hazah · · Score: 1

      As a buddhist (actually as a human), I do have a natural aversion to violence. The sad state of affairs is such that I cannot see any other resolution. Unless we rid ourselves (litterally) of these bad apples, the desease will continue. The other side of the coin isn't that much brigher though, as another infection will take its place. It is unfortunate that blood must flow (mark my words, eventually, it will), yet it is, ultimately, the human condition. We all seem to want justice, but our error is giving justice to those that deserves none. That is the flaw with political correctness. It mistakes equality for similarity, and we all become victims (including the perpetrators).

    8. Re:WTF?!!? by hazah · · Score: 1

      It makes so much sense that the only people against it are the politicians and the lobbyists.

      See the problem?

    9. Re:WTF?!!? by snowraver1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is why, I think that you should be able to vote for no one. I would rather have an empty chair represent me than most of the crooks currenly in office.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    10. Re:WTF?!!? by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      It would be, but these "baby eaters" are simply psychopaths with no conscience with excellent skills at social manipulation, lying and cheating and the average people, pathetic as they are, will readily succumb to their manipulation.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    11. Re:WTF?!!? by garbut · · Score: 1

      Wrong. He nailed it. Reactions like yours come from well-conditioned msm junkies. Just consider it for a moment - the possibility that they've done a real number on you.

      --
      Oh, should I have sugar-coated that?
    12. Re:WTF?!!? by garbut · · Score: 1

      I'm hoping if we wake enough of them up that we just might turn this around.

      --
      Oh, should I have sugar-coated that?
    13. Re:WTF?!!? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Chips in asses has already been done.

    14. Re:WTF?!!? by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't a better idea be just *not* *electing* baby-eaters to Parliament?

      The problem is that only baby eaters are standing for election...

      --
      No sig today...
    15. Re:WTF?!!? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I never said he was the answer, I said that he was trying to expose the problem. Please save the straw man arguments for someone else.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    16. Re:WTF?!!? by amoeba1911 · · Score: 1

      sadly enough an empty chair would be much more beneficial to society than most politicians.

      Empty chairs aren't corrupt. Empty chairs don't take your rights. Empty chairs don't give subsidies to their friends. Empty chairs don't collect huge wages and lifetime of medical/dental benefits. Empty chairs don't do insider trading. Okay, now that I think about it, I can't think of a single way a crooked politician would be better than an empty chair. Vote Empty Chair for Congress!

    17. Re:WTF?!!? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Like he asks you to do with corporate media, search outside for facts. Don't listen to just him, there is a whole lot of shit out there for you to read. Hopefully you begin to see how important that is after you see the sham currently being propagated.

      Do I think he's a bit alarmist? Maybe, but he's also trying to wake up a crowd of people mesmerized with a corporate media that's doing everything it can to keep the truth from people. It's probably the best track to take right now, yell really loud and hopefully get some people thinking.. and pray for a chain reaction.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    18. Re:WTF?!!? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      There is, at least in the US, but it takes work and it's not instant gratification. Petition to get people you know on ballots and get the crooks out of office.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    19. Re:WTF?!!? by bsdewhurst · · Score: 1
      As long as the empty chair is counted as voting for the status quo, otherwise it is just fewer people that need bribing to pass a bad law.

      E.g. if you had a house of 300 people , Company X needs to bribe 151 to get their law past. If you had a house of 300 people where 100 where empty chairs and don't vote then X only needs to bribe 101 people (much cheaper). Under my plan X would still need to bribe 151 people but there are only 200 people to bribe (because the 100 empty chairs automatically vote against) so they need to bribe 75%+1 instead of 50%+1 and hopefully you can get 25% of the elected to be decent people and stop the paid for law.

    20. Re:WTF?!!? by newbie_fantod · · Score: 1

      Canada is just as corrupt as the US, and Mexico.

      Oh please!

      You obviously have no God damned idea of how fortunate and privileged you are to be living in what ever comfortable liberal democracy it is that you come from.

      Go spend a few months in the Third World (and I don't mean Club Med) and you'll see what corruption means.

    21. Re:WTF?!!? by hazah · · Score: 1

      Yes, I've been waiting for that option. It will also send a (unheard) message saying I want none of them. A man can dream...

    22. Re:WTF?!!? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Wow, do you know how to read and think? I'm guessing not.

      Don't listen to just him, there is a whole lot of shit out there for you to read.

      prior to that I wrote:

      I never said he was the answer, I said that he was trying to expose the problem.

      No wonder you post anonymously! I would not want to put my name next to such an irrational set of statements either. There was no wiggle room in the statements of opinion I presented, they were very concrete. You somehow took a concrete statement and reversed it's meaning. You may wish to seek professional help.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  2. Who needs... by MitchDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... Al Qaeda when you have the US and Canadian Governments?

    1. Re:Who needs... by dubbreak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well it's a lobby group, so you have to look for the source of the funding.

      I really think there need to be tighter laws on funding lobbyists (preferable it weren't legal, but that's never going to happen). How much of the money funding this group is foreign? It's one thing having Canadian companies spend money to have their political views "better heard" and completely different if this is being funded by outside (e.g. US) sources. Another country should not be able to shape our laws and legislation. It's bad enough companies within our country can push their agendas via money, but at least (if they are Canadian owed) it's Canadian agendas. The whole IP reform does not seem Canadian.

      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:Who needs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lobbying used to be called bribery and it used to be illegal. WTF happened?

  3. Hey there. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Hey there, watcha doin' on them tubes, eh?

  4. get off my internet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There needs to be some law or provision set where they can't keep trying this BS. Canadians have already told
    them to kindly take off. Leave our internet alone.

    1. Re:get off my internet! by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2

      This is no representative democracy -- corporations and private interest groups aren't people.

      How about we stop letting *groups* lobby? Instead, it's up to individuals, and they get their names named. If we see "Joe Canuck, CEO of AmericanIPImports lobbied government for providing personal information to US IP counterparts with no oversight", it may just affect his career.

      We need more insight into the people behind the lobbies, and they need more accountability.

      Now this won't stop lobby trading or "fall guy" lobbying, and it may have a negative impact on people lobbying for unpopular but necessary changes, but we have swung so far away from personal accountability in politics that it's time to inject a bit again.

    2. Re:get off my internet! by James+McGuigan · · Score: 1

      This is the art of negotiation, ask for double and then agree to meet half way.

      The MAFIAA see that there is alot of resistance to these ideas, so lets ask for something even more extreme and then after forcing everybody to spend alot of time and energy discussing these ideas through the political process, the politicians can listen to arguments from both sides and then agree a "compromise" solution which is only half-extreme, which is exactly what they wanted in the first place.

      The problem is that these industries have enough money that can afford to employ dozens of people full time who job it is, is to keep pushing this side of the argument. Our side requires many of us to spend our valuable free time and energy to keep pushing the other side of the coin.

    3. Re:get off my internet! by hazah · · Score: 1

      This only means that we are not equal in the eyes of the law. And suggesting it is a blatant lie.

  5. Canadian tax payers demand representation for tax by aristotle-dude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the government insists on collecting income tax and sales tax from me then I demand that they start representing me. Here is what I want them to say to the Canadian IP Council: GTFO.

    I not only pay my taxes but I buy music and TV shows from iTunes. However, I have no interest in seem more laws. I want smaller government, not a larger welfare state for the corporations or individuals. Corporations should be forced to use civil courts for their grievances for copyright. It should be considered breach of contract or license and not a criminal act.

    Stop using my tax money for your crap.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  6. Probably unlikely by MrKevvy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The majority Conservatives already dropped all of these provisions from C-11 as they're highly unpopular. Recent polls are now in the news showing that the New Democrats are tied with them, and may even be slightly leading. I really doubt they will back this and risk the next election over it.

    --
    -- Insert witty one-liner here. --
    1. Re:Probably unlikely by silentbrad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately, I have a feeling they'll be of the mindset of, "we'll do what we want now, and use the last year to make everyone think we're the best option again."

    2. Re:Probably unlikely by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 1

      The next election is a long way off. This is the time for Harper to implement these unpopular measures. They'll be out-of-mind for voters 3 years from now.

      --

      From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

    3. Re:Probably unlikely by tbannist · · Score: 1

      I think the Conservative plan is closer to "We'll do what we want now, and spend tax payer money to convince Canadians that we're good and spend our party's war chest to convince Canadians that everyone else is bad".

      The difference is all their positive advertising is based on spending tax dollars to promote their own party which should be illegal.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    4. Re:Probably unlikely by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not if we kill 13 of them. Then they lose their majority and force another election.

      If I'm going to spend the rest of my life in prison, it sure as fuck will be for a real crime.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    5. Re:Probably unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let's just stick with democracy and its processes, what ya say? I *like* peaceful democracy, I *like* not having a soldier on every corner during elections; it's something worth keeping.

      The root problem here is that that 24.2% of Canadians can give a single party a "majority" (39.2% of 61.1% turnout) government. This false majority, coupled with a political system in which all three federal parties view themselves as pursuing a leadership role (rather than a representative role) in Canadian society, is creating a distance between our MPs & us.

      What we need is proportional representation. The system we have in place, now, worked well for a different kind of Canada, when we were a groups of small cities, many tiny towns, and no real way to communicate or interact economically (with any efficiency). But we are primarily urban now, many of our "pocket" economies have grown and overlapped with adjacent economies. The general economy is probably sustainable on its own, and we are all wired (financially and socially) from coast to coast to coast.

      The current system is a leader's system, necessarily. It is a nation-building style of nation management. But, like oligarchic media control, its time has come and gone. We need a system of government that reflects our democratic inclinations. The nation is built, and a nation-building style of government is not the most suitable form of government for us, any more. I suggest we revise our government with proportional representation, paralleling Swedish or Dutch systems. These systems are not likely to be as efficient as an "easy majority", but they (to me) look like a more pure form of democracy, more capable of representing the views & ideals of those who bother to vote.

      The only parties who are going to hold my attention, in the next election, are going to be those who declare their *absolute* intention to implement proportional representation. I don't care how fringe they are, if they're the only ones committed to it, they get my vote. If there was a party running in the next federal election, whose sole purpose (their entire platform) was to simply implement proportional representation, and then quit & call another election, I'd vote for them in a heartbeat.

      So, c'mon man, just tuck your guns away and save them for the apocalypse; there are other, non-violent ways to approach this.

    6. Re:Probably unlikely by alexo · · Score: 1

      The majority Conservatives already dropped all of these provisions from C-11 as they're highly unpopular. Recent polls are now in the news showing that the New Democrats are tied with them, and may even be slightly leading. I really doubt they will back this and risk the next election over it.

      Please cite your sources.

      All the sources that I can find claim that C-11 is completely unchanged from its first introduction as Harper's Conservatives blocked *all* of the proposed amendments.

      Some light reading:
      http://www.michaelgeist.ca/tags/c-11

    7. Re:Probably unlikely by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter too much one way or the other. Even if the law passed, it would be declared unconstitutional in Canada. In Canadaland, the SCC is the final check on the government and they can and will void any laws they see fit. Sure the government can rewrite the law, but getting it into compliance is much harder than simply scraping the entire idea.

      We don't have dumb justices in our supreme court. And half of them are conservative, before people go all flappy-eyed and insane.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re:Probably unlikely by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      I agree, we should have proportional representation. It makes sense. What we have now just doesn't work right, and you get vote splitting and bad choices all around.

      The Americans have a saying: "There are four boxes to use in the defence of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Use in that order."

      Soap boxes are illegal. You protest, you go to prison if the government decides that it's an illegal protest. G20, G8, Montreal. Warrantless monitoring of everything that happens online? That's an excuse to arrest people who are planning to protest the government.
      The ballot boxes were stolen from us. The courts have proven that there was fraud in Etobicoke at the very least. I'm not saying the CPC did it, but they're the only party that's trying to get a court order to say that it shouldn't be investigated.
      The legal options are getting pretty sparse. Now we've got a majority of SCJ appointed by the guy who likely stole the election.
      Rifles don't have to be registered anymore.

      People talk about Harper making Canada unrecognizable, but how bad we we have fallen it be if we started using "American Options" to remove politicians we don't like? I'd like to see the lot of our current "Honourable" members led out of the HoC in handcuffs for election fraud. I don't want to see anybody hurt, and I'd love the delicious irony of the CPC losing confidence due to a procedural error.

      Maybe when they go to vote on the budget a couple dozen of us will jump in front of the MP's cars, get run over, and keep them from getting to work. They'd lose the vote, lose confidence, and force an election. Hmm, that might actually work.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    9. Re:Probably unlikely by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      They are the same dipshits tossing moltov cocktails during peaceful marches.

      Those would be agents provacatuers or "cops".

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  7. One year of Harper by msobkow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is the damage done by one year of Harper.

    We've three more years of hell before we'll be rid of him, even though his government is illegitimate and does not have a real majority because of the robocall scandal.

    Living under a fascist government sucks royally when their ideals for the nation are your worst nightmares.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:One year of Harper by SteveFoerster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Kind of sucks when Americans can't even say, "That's it, I'm moving to Canada!"

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    2. Re:One year of Harper by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, the whole province (lets say more than 80%...) voted for Jack Layton and Ontario which was around 50% for NPD and conserv party aren't to blame in this. It's rather the "west side" of Canada that is to blame if we got these kinds of lay because they mostly voted for the conservative party. Steven Harper showed the whole country you don't need Quebec to get the majority in the Gov. And everyone knows what happens if Steven Harper had the majority in the gov. He can do what he wants without any questions asked...well a lot less trouble if he would be in a minor gov. So it's Canadian's problem if we got those type of laws.

      Since I live in Quebec, I don't even consider myself a Canadian because of my views with Harper and his evil minions. Besides, most western province don't like us for very good reasons anyone...and i don't blame them too. My province is not run properly so we ask more than we give and were stuck with Canada for now.

    3. Re:One year of Harper by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

      Kind of sucks when Americans can't even say, "That's it, I'm moving to Canada!"

      But... We're only doing this to make you feel more at home!

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    4. Re:One year of Harper by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It sounds like your Harper is little different than our Dubya was. Well, maybe not as bad, nobody has attacked Canada and Harper hasn't invaded a foreign country because of bad intel.

      I fear that Romney may win the Presidency and take us back to the Bush years. MBAs apparently make awful Presidents, especially "trickle down" politicians like Bush and Romney.

      I urge my neighbors in the Great White North to fight the madness the MAFIAA is trying to inflict on you.

    5. Re:One year of Harper by compro01 · · Score: 1

      It's rather the "west side" of Canada that is to blame if we got these kinds of lay because they mostly voted for the conservative party.

      Saskatchewan is solid blue because the federal ridings are gerrymandered to hell and gone. the NDP voters in Regina and Saskatoon are divided up and lumped in with conservative voting rural areas. In Saskatchewan, the NDP got 32.3% of the votes and 0% of the seats.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    6. Re:One year of Harper by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      It's an interesting situation -- provincially the western provinces tend to vote closer to liberal than to conservative (NDP has strong support in some areas) -- but western provinces traditionally vote conservative federally because they've felt that they have no real voice in a Liberal parliament, that tended to cater to Ontario interests primarily, with just a nod to everyone else (note that the Maritimes tend to get ignored by ALL governments).

      As for the Quebec vs Alberta/BC animosity -- I think much of that is actually aimed at a few relatively specific things: 1) subsidies vs voting power, 2) the Liberal party, 3) the BQ and PQ, but only in how it relates to item 1. The main beef all around is that the government is spending "undue amounts" of taxpayer money on special interests that don't benefit the voting majority, and often divide the country more than fostering healthy multiculturalism.

      However, other than a few Conservative strongholds (mostly districts that have a LARGE proportion of people and money that is 1st gen Canadian), I think you'll find that the west and Quebec have pretty similar views on the running of their own governments, distinct society, the fostering of multiculturalism, special interests, and the waste of government resources. All we need to do now is find some resource in Quebec that's really valuable, and maybe Ontario will no longer feel like it's acting like a geriatric Alpha Male to the other provinces (except the Maritimes, who need to discover unobtanium or something similar themselves in order to get themselves heard).

    7. Re:One year of Harper by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      That might be true but my numbers are from the time Harper got elected. All the numbers were in the newspaper all over the country. Your numbers might be from today cause no way it was from that time...hell no.

    8. Re:One year of Harper by WebCowboy · · Score: 1

      This is the damage done by one year of Harper.

      So why is this "interesting" and not "offtopic" or "troll"? How is the release of a policy document from a Hollywood-industry lobby group the result of a conservative government policy? The parent comment to yours mentioned that though not perfect, the current copyright bill was significantly toned town through both public pressure and (believe it or not, I'm sure you won't due to your blind partisanship) genuine concern from those within the Conservative party. "Damage done"? If anything this is evidence of "disaster averted"...for now. Obviously the Hollywood lobby is not happy with the resulting copyright bill and has published this policy document to demonstrate what they will be pushing for (far) beyond what the government has accepted.

      Liberals and their supporters have no ground to stand on in this issue either--it was under a Liberal regime that copyright bills were twice introduced that were fairly more onerous than what is now before the House.

      We've three more years of hell before we'll be rid of him, even though his government is illegitimate and does not have a real majority because of the robocall scandal.

      So now we head from troll to off-topic. There is no connection at all between how the last election was conducted and what an industrial-lobbyist reports as their copyright policy in any way at all. The government is no less legitimate than Cretien's was in 1997. In fact, Cretien's was less legitimate because he got a lower percentage of the popular vote but his party won MORE seats, and Cretien's government was tainted by major scandal and was notoriously dishonest during its campaigning as well. Scandal knows no ideology, and it is quite very obviously clear your disatisfaction is ideological in nature and you are mostly upset because you'd very much rather everyone agreed with you and voted NDP (what is the point of the Liberals anyways--the party is dead and should be killed or subsumed by the NDP siince they are basically the same now--just call it the Liberal-Democrats).

      The NDP have never run a federal government so it is easy for them to be critical and have immunity to scandal, but look at their track record at other levels of government--just as often as they are quietly competent and responsible (Manitoba, Saskatchewan) they can be disastrous, inept and/or corrupt (BC, Ontario). There is NO WAY WHATSOEVER that one could make a convincing argument that an NDP government would be able to get away with rebuffing ACTA completely, ignoring the need to update/reform copyright or implement copyright policy completely counter to the rest of the world and would be able to do so without some consequences on trade relations, much less think that if Mulcair became PM that lobbyists would just magically go "oh no Tom is PM! I guess we should just give up!". Could they do better? Maybe, maybe not. The US tried to vote for big change and got Obama and for all the "hope" he campaigned on, big business is still well cared for, big copyright lobbiests still have bi-partisan influence, the economy still struggles, the debt still looms large and on and on.

      Some things are bigger than "ooh those nasty Tories". Copyright policy doesn't neatly follow partisan lines and though it is federal juristiction it is quite obviously influenced heavily on an international scale by industries whose business models are heavily dependent on legislatively-protected monopolies. Replacing the "fascist" Tories for the "communist" NDP won't stop these kinds of policy documents or the pressure by the lobbyist authors of them from perstering governments. Like cockroaches the lobbyists will always be there and the only thing that will keep them at bay is the public/electorate at large becoming more civic-minded and politicaly active to counter--regardless of ideology/political leanings. (I know I know, the NDP aren't really communist and some of their more strident members might argue they're barely socialist anymore, but calling the Tories fascist is just as offensive and inaccurate and an insult to those who have had to endure REAL fascist governments. In fact some might say the Tories are barely even "conservative").

    9. Re:One year of Harper by WebCowboy · · Score: 1

      Saskatchewan is solid blue because the federal ridings are gerrymandered to hell and gone.

      The Conservative party had ZERO to do with this--blame Cretien-era Liberals since they had the most clout in the last review of electoral divisions. That is when Saskatoon and Regina were carved up and lumped in with vast swaths of surrounding prairie. It appears to have been a strategy to ensure Liberal cabinet ministers like Ralph Goodale had more opportunity to be competitive mostly at the expense of the NDP. For example, Regina as a city is pretty left leaning, so it was carved up and Mr. Goodale was in one of those ridings (wascana which takes in a corner of Regina but a big rural area too).

      The whole province is set up a bit weird now though--it is almost ANTI-gerrymandered...most of the ridings are 3-way races nowadays and the whole province could look different from one election to the next. Conservatives got the most vots and the most seats though--one time in BC the Liberas "won" with less votes than the NDP but more seats. Now, THAT smells like a problem.

    10. Re:One year of Harper by compro01 · · Score: 1

      That might be true but my numbers are from the time Harper got elected. All the numbers were in the newspaper all over the country. Your numbers might be from today cause no way it was from that time...hell no.

      As are mine. My 32.3% figure is from the last election.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    11. Re:One year of Harper by compro01 · · Score: 1

      1. I said it's gerrymandered, I didn't say the Conservatives were the ones who did it, just that they're the ones benefiting from it.

      2. Three-way-race? You are obviously not looking at Saskatchewan election results. There is not a single riding where the 3rd place party was anywhere close and only 4 where the 2nd place was fairly close. The remainder had the Conservatives getting 1.5-3x as many votes as the next candidate.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    12. Re:One year of Harper by caseih · · Score: 1

      Could be worse. You could live in Canada under Harper *and* Alberta under Redford. Talk about absolute rule by fear. Reminds me of elections in communist countries.

    13. Re:One year of Harper by dryeo · · Score: 1

      It sounds like your Harper is little different than our Dubya was. Well, maybe not as bad, nobody has attacked Canada and Harper hasn't invaded a foreign country because of bad intel

      Harper is worse then Bush, not only has he roughly the same philosophy, but he is very smart and patient. He managed to show false colours for years when he had a minority and every time he didn't get his way, managed to turn it around that the opposition was the bad guy. Even when he prorogued parliament to avoid losing a confidence vote with the opposition parties promising to form a coalition government, he turned it around to where they were undemocratic because they'd be representing the split majority.
      The problem with our form of government is that the parties vote as a block, so a majority of 51% translates as a dictatorship for up to five years.
      Harper also really wanted to join in the Iraqi invasion and the only reason he didn't was because he knew there'd be an election over it which he would lose. He was as happy as shit to lead the bombing of Libya, had to be pushed to get out of Afghanistan. Has been found in contempt of Parliament (only one ever) for lying about how much the no-bid purchase of the F35 was going to cost. And the F35 is useless for protecting Canada's North, having only one engine amongst other things.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    14. Re:One year of Harper by Painted · · Score: 1

      I'd far far far FAR rather live under Redford's Conservatives than the Wild Rose's "Hate the cities, bash the gays" neo-conservatives....

      --
      http://marsandmore.com - Posters of space, spacecraft, and astronomy.
  8. The Tree of Liberty by cpu6502 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "From time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Civil disobedience is its nature manure." - Thomas Jefferson, 1790s. Of course what Jefferson ACTUALLY did was to form a new party called the Democrat-Republicans, and takeover the government in 1800. They dominated politics for the next three decades. WE need to take back our government(s) in Canada, the EU and the US.

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    1. Re:The Tree of Liberty by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      Lobby exist to destroy those powerful "groups" unfortunately. Besides, if you look at the parties that already exist right now, who can lead Canada better than Harper ?That is a good question.

    2. Re:The Tree of Liberty by tbannist · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is that a trick question? Mulcair, Rae or May would probably be better than Harper. I'm not particularly fond of the NDP, Liberals or Green party, each party has it's own problems. However, I detest the Conservative Party. The CPC is engaged in a grand enterprise to dismantle Canadian society for the benefit of resource extraction companies.

      Harper's conservatives fire or muzzle scientists to hide inconvenient facts, lie about nearly everything, are under investigation for vote fraud, and have been convicted of money laundering during elections. They have taken the mechanisms of Parliament and turned them into instruments to wage war against the other political parties and the people who support them. They seem incapable of seeing government as anything other than a war of "us versus them". The Canadian government hasn't always been that way, Harper and cronies just keep seeming to find new lows to sink to.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    3. Re:The Tree of Liberty by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Lobby exist to destroy those powerful "groups" unfortunately. Besides, if you look at the parties that already exist right now, who can lead Canada better than Harper ?That is a good question.

      Anybody who is willing to compromise as long as it is a minority government.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    4. Re:The Tree of Liberty by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      Don't you remember, last election was a minority government, look what happened... nothing special. It was more problematic that it is now.

    5. Re:The Tree of Liberty by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Read my post again, Anybody who is willing to compromise. The Conservatives have not been willing to compromise or even be honest about certain things like how much the F35 fighters cost and whether they're even useful for arctic conditions. How much building a bunch of prisons are going to cost to throw people like me in jail as I don't want to support drug gangs and to grow a bit of pot from seed means planting more then 6 plants outside where there is high mortality and 50% males. Allowing DRM to be broken for personal use so I can play my legally bought DVDs on my computer and so on.
      A party that is only representing slightly more then 1/3rd of voters shouldn't be allowed to run roughshod over the rest.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    6. Re:The Tree of Liberty by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      Look, there in majority now. it doesn't matter if its minority or majority. The only thing that matters is that the conservative party is the problem...minor or major... that doesn't matter

  9. And an acid belching mutant pony by istartedi · · Score: 1

    No. An army of acid belching mutant ponies. With cyborg riders designed to override all of Asimov's laws on command from central in an undisclosed island fortress, accessible only via private submarine.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:And an acid belching mutant pony by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      No. An army of acid belching mutant ponies. With cyborg riders designed to override all of Asimov's laws on command from central in an undisclosed island fortress, accessible only via private submarine.

      ... for the children, of course. Anyone who doesn't agree is just helping the pedophiles escape

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  10. Re:Canadian tax payers demand representation for t by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well if there was any sort of meaningful political and economic consequence for representing private interests at societies general expense, then this behaviour might stop. But as it is, the same two parties representing slightly different business interests flip in and out of power as they screw up the living standards further, while retired politicians go on to make millions from their time in power. This is not just a Canada/US phenomena, and big mainstream media keeps us all fearful and voting for the same clowns time and again. Sigh.

  11. Do While... by mk1004 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a war of attrition: 1) A bill is submitted, public outrage ensues, legislators back off support, the bill dies. 2) A new, slightly different bill is submitted. 3) . Goto 1. Oops, forgot to put in the "public finally gets tired of hearing about it, less and less outrage, a bill finally passes" exit from the loop. Lobbyists never quit.

    --
    I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    1. Re:Do While... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      An effective strategy. It goes hand-in-hand with the overreaching approach of lobbying for something completly unrealistic in order to achieve a lesser but similar goal.

    2. Re:Do While... by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      Lobbyists are in effect public figures so put up a Facebook page identifying them, photos, businesses and names, and what they are peddling so the whole country can know.

    3. Re:Do While... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Why would that stop them? Head MPAA lobbyist Chris Dodd offered Obama a bribe on national TV and everyone took it as business as usual.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  12. life's gonna be so cyberpunk by KingBenny · · Score: 1

    goths will feel like they created the world and Le philip de Dick will be tossing around in his grave partying til eternity o no wait, i meant like terminator-esque, o no wait , i cant find the right novel / movie to compare it with, hunger games was so oscarry and mostly boring

    --
    Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  13. Good sign by oneandoneis2 · · Score: 1

    The more unsuccessful an interest group becomes, the more strident and extreme its demands become.

    This is a direct result of the failure of ACTA, SOPA et al - a desperation move, not the head-in-the-sand reaction implied by the summary.

    --
    So.. it has come to this
  14. 1984? by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the Canadians finally read the book.

  15. Let me say sorry for your predicament. by Paracelcus · · Score: 1

    Now that Canada seems to be twirling down the same fascist toilet as my own beloved America, you folks can begin to understand our predicament!

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
    1. Re:Let me say sorry for your predicament. by Lucky75 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We've always understood your predicament. That's why Canadians cared so much about SOPA and DMCA, because as soon as it happens there, the same lobby will try up here.

      --
      DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
  16. Long-term solution by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that the obvious long-term solution to this problem is to create lobby groups that are diametrically opposed to these IP lobby groups. The IP lobby groups aren't going away, so we need more ALCUs in this world to defend civil liberties, privacy, and advocate massive copyright reform.

  17. Our nukes by Flipstylee · · Score: 1

    Sometimes i have this idea that we should just launch our 5000 or how many we have straight up,
    and once they reign down, the 8 of us that survive can feel the freedom our forefathers had,
    and we can do like we did before and make a pilgrimage for the new homeland... /pissyrant

    Being an American was once something to be proud of, granted far before i was born, but, wtf happened?
    If i say we need to take the government back i'm red-flagged and a terrorist, i'm told to cast my vote to the pre-seeded bullshit,
    i once saw the quote that said it better than i could: "If elections changed anything they'd have been outlawed years ago".

    1. Re:Our nukes by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      i once saw the quote that said it better than i could: "If elections changed anything they'd have been outlawed years ago".

      Yea, that is a good one, isn't it?

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  18. Conservative - You keep using that word... by Jawnn · · Score: 2

    ...and spending hundreds of millions of tax dollars on private enforcement.

    Right out of the "conservative" playbook - "socialize expenses, privatize profits". I like my word better - fascist.

  19. This is with us being good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "The report doesn't mention that the Business Software Alliance recently released its annual global software piracy report with new data that not only shows that Canada hit yet another all-time low but has the biggest percentage decline in the world over the past five years." - http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6528/125/

    I would hate to see what they would do if pirating was getting worse.

  20. Re:The US is... by hazah · · Score: 1

    More like a rapist. Keeps you alive with all your memories intact, under the pretence of sending you a message.

  21. How quickly will others rush to our aid? by mark-t · · Score: 1

    When the USA was threatened with SOPA, many critics united from all over the world in an almost single voice to make their objections to it known... and the impact was felt.

    With Canada now facing the same issue, I cannot help but wonder if other countries will be as willing to help a country that may only have a tenth of the population, but is one that is supposed to be no less free.

    1. Re:How quickly will others rush to our aid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If Americans were smart, they'd be extremely interested in what's going on up here and very supportive. As soon as these things get passed up here the US Lobbyists will run back to congress/lawmakers and go "Look look! they have it, we're no longer the "best" at protecting IP. Implement the same things!!!"

      And it will be done. It happens often enough.

  22. Re:Canadian tax payers demand representation for t by hemo_jr · · Score: 1

    It only costs big IP about $100 million a year to suborn the U.S. federal government, administration and Congress. What are they spending up in Canada?

  23. US Gov't already has access to CDN private data by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1

    The 2011 Canadian census was processed by Lockheed Martin. Under the Patriot Act, Homeland Security can compel any US company to surrender any data, and can also compel them to withhold all information about the surrender of data. So if Homeland Security wanted the 2011 Canadian census data, they could get it, and nobody would hear about it.

    This represents a definitive intelligence test. If you think they don't already have it, you're incredibly stupid.

    --

    War as we knew it was obsolete
    Nothing could beat complete denial
    - Emily Haines
    1. Re:US Gov't already has access to CDN private data by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      According to the very link that you've given, Lockheed Martin was contracted to develop software for data processing; they were not given the data itself. It then proceeds to claim, with no proofs, that LM might have inserted some kind of backdoor into said software to harvest data, and that the data thereby harvested would be subject to PATRIOT Act. Which looks like a conspiracy theory, pretty much.

  24. Re:Canadian tax payers demand representation for t by dryeo · · Score: 1

    In the last Canadian election, the third party increased their number of seats by close to an order of magnitude compared to their previous best showing, to become the official opposition. Sadly the first thing they did was move towards the centre. Policies like legalizing marijuana, dropped, along with much else of their platform that I've always liked. It's sad that, especially in first past the post systems, that no matter who the parties are, they end up the same.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  25. Re:Canadian tax payers demand representation for t by dryeo · · Score: 1

    Our present government is very pro (big) business and probably at heart believe that if you're smart enough to buy some IP, then you deserve the full protection of the State to protect your property.
    Of course the fact that almost every media outlet (owned by 2 or 3 companies now) was pushing the current government full time during the last election is much of the reason they were voted in and I'd guess they remind the government of this regularly.
    Our campaign reforms haven't seemed to have worked and the first thing this government did was remove the public half of those reforms.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  26. That's it... by Fuck_this_place · · Score: 1

    I want OFF this fucking planet.

  27. Government is the enemy by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

    Live your life accordingly.