Canadians Battling Proposed Canadian DMCA 202
An anonymous reader writes "CTV reports on how Canadians are fighting back against the Canadian DMCA. Led by Michael Geist, the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group is nearing 90,000 members. There are local chapters, a YouTube contest, wikis, and people writing letters and organizing rallies against the copyright bill. Geist said, 'When you get tens of thousands of Canadians speaking out like this, there's big political risk for any political party who chooses to ignore it.'"
No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
Prentice and the Tories don't need to worry about voters. I'm sure they've been paid handsomely by American media giants for their co-operation.
Re:No Worries (Score:4, Insightful)
But that money only keeps rolling for as long as they have their finger on the button. Ya know, despite everything else, the final say in who gets to take the bribes is with the voters.
No conspiracy theory here (Score:5, Insightful)
Despite the conspiracy theories you're likely to hear about this, the reason why the DMCA sailed through Congress is the same reason it'll sail through Canada's legislative process... media companies are responsible for a nice chunk of GNP (and whatever they call it in Canada), and neither side, liberal or conservative, is willing give up that wealth. And both sides believe that things like high technology for consumers and piracy is a danger to their broadcasters and publishers.
The reason opponents are going to lose on this is that all major parties will be on board with the copyright holders. And average voters don't give a rat's ass about copyright reform crusades.
Re:No Worries (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Political Repurcussions (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that this doesn't seem to have any escape path. Or rather, it doesn't matter what side you vote. The (new) Republicans are for big government and cracking down on whatever perceived crime exists, not to mention that "those intarwebs" and the uncontrolable spread of information, opinion and propaganda is usually not really something the new kind of Rep enjoys.
The Democrats otoh have traditionally good ties with Hollywood and the media.
In other words, you're fucked either way. The DMCA is on both sides' agenda.
Re:Political Repurcussions (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because there really is only one side in US politics, the one with the money.
As long as TV advertising is the way to get voters this will not change.
Re:No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
That may be true in the US, but in Canada the general public seems to put a little more effort into elections than just voting for the person who has the most signs on front lawns.
It needs to be said... (Score:5, Insightful)
Michael Geist is a shining example of why academics are critically important in society - and why governments detest them. His running analysis of bill C-61 has been eloquent, straightforward and polite. He has earned a loyal following be clearly explaining what the flaws of the legislation are and how they will impact Canadians in everyday use (for example, how the Government is touting the clauses that grant timeshifting and device shifting rights while glossing over the fact that other parts of the legislation effectively neuter consumer rights where DRM is involved).
Dr. Geist's blog posts and editorials in several major Canadian newspapers encouraged me to write to several members of parliament after a lifetime of political apathy. More importantly, I've done my best to explain the legislation's flaws to others, too, in the hope that they will take action. Several have, also for the first time.
Re:No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, they say you can't buy votes but that's not really true and you know it. Who cares if 2000 knowledgable voters get pissed at you if 5000 clueless voters vote for you instead with your new campaigning budget? It doesn't really matter where and why the vote comes from, a vote is as good as any other. People don't want to hear the truth, they want to hear how you'll make their lives so much better so it's tough to call someone on talking bullshit - even when they're not pimping some lobbyist agenda they are telling you sweet, sweet lies.
Re:No conspiracy theory here (Score:3, Insightful)
The situation isn't really all that different in the States and it still got passed here. In Canada, basically you can't give more than $1000 per year to a candidate. In the US, the amount is $2300 per election (primary and general are separate). In both countries, contributions by corporations and unions are not allowed. In the US they can form PACs from their employees/members, but I'm not sure if something similar exists in Canada.
In the end though, I think it has little to do with direct bribing and more to do with ignorance. Media companies lobby both governments about how these laws need to be passed to reign in copyright infringement so that their revenues (and the gov't tax revenues) can stay high.
Canada doesn't rig elections like the US (Score:1, Insightful)
So, if even slashdot users can't remember who caused the original DMCA to happen, what hope is there that any Canadian politicians would be worried?
Wikipedia is at your fingertips... Introduced by Howard Coble. Of course, that illustrates an even more interesting problem. This is his district. [wikipedia.org] Now have a look at district 12. [wikipedia.org] Howard Coble is only in office because of unconstitutional gerrymandering. [adversity.net] The only way that bastard is leaving office is in a casket. He can shove whatever shit he wants right down your throat and there's not a damn thing you or anyone else can do about it. Of course, that isn't a problem in Canada, so anyone fool enough to push a DMCA up there can expect to lose their job.
Re:No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:My MP is ignoring it... (Score:2, Insightful)
This guy and his corrupt party just make me mad...
Re:Political Repurcussions (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps I can explain why you recall a level of sneaky-ness. At the time it got very little attention, as everyone was breathlessly awaiting more news about BC getting a blow job or diddling Monica with cigars... Certainly the dog and pony show drew attention away from the geeks crying foul.
Educated and Informed -- about issues. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
A fact that I am infinitely grateful for. Electing judges and district attorneys, for example, is pure madness.
Re:No conspiracy theory here (Score:5, Insightful)
What's the point in bringing down the government if the end result is to end up where you started?
Well, some would say principles but we all know there's no room for that in politics.
It's funny what you get used to. (Score:5, Insightful)
We have a bill, moving forward, over which the citizenry seems to be divided between those opposed and those apathetic. And, nevertheless, the bill has a credible shot at passing, and this is treated as a fairly unremarkable occurrence. The fact that legislation can happen, in absence of popular support, unless some(large) quantity of displeasure materializes, is a seriously broken imitation of representative government.
It shouldn't take mass protest to kill legislation that has near zero popular support, it should simply die as a matter of course. How did we come to accept a situation where that isn't the case?
Re:Canada is a democracy (Score:2, Insightful)
I think by "20" you mean "5".
Re:No Worries (Score:4, Insightful)
My precise thoughts about encouraging everyone to vote, even if they have no clue about what they are voting on! The obligation should be to find out what they are voting on, what the likely actions of the proposals are, and THEN cast an educated vote.
Having people who don't have a clue is part of how we got gw bush.
Re:THEFT is THEFT! (Score:1, Insightful)
Idiot, the point is that even the LEGAL copying becomes outlawed with the new bill.
Got a home stereo?
Got an MP3 player?
Got a computer?
Got a car?
Got all four?
Want to buy four copies of everything because the new law says format shifting is illegal*?
OR would you rather pay once for a song that you can listen to where every you happen to be?
The bill isn't just about file sharing, thats already illegal anyway (keep in mind the differnce between Canadian and American law at this point please. Things like the blank media levy make a big difference), this bill is trying to make DRM and Trusted Computing a governmentally enforced way of life.
*Technically the law says format shifting is legal, however is also makes cracking any DRM illegal, so if your music came with DRM format shifting is illegal. Nice catch there eh?
Re:No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually in Canada politicians are not allowed to take donations from corporations and individuals are limited to small donations.
The problem here is not money it's the previous government signing a treaty that makes something like the DMCA a requirement and the US ambassador lobbying on behalf of the RIAA/MPAA threatening to damage Canada's economy with a trade war.
The other real problem is that Prentice doesn't have enough of a backbone.
Re:No Worries (Score:4, Insightful)
When you have compulsory voting politicians are forced to address issues that matter to their electorate (rather than just the subset who are voters) and people who otherwise would cynically ignore elections are forced to pay attention to their choices and how they will be affected by them.
Speaking from experience living in a country that has compulsory voting your opinion is incorrect. Just like non-compulsory voting you have blocs who are dedicated to one party or another and rarely change based on the issues raised at election. Indeed this steady bloc who are forced to vote makes it much harder for a seat to change hands as the candidate or party has to really tick off the electorate for those rusted-on supporters to change their mind and help tumble the incumbent out of power. (Also known as a protest vote). Hence with compulsory voting apart from the protest vote, the other way for change to occur is for the demographic of the electorate to change. Eg, for agricultural seats to acquire a more cosmpolitan community.
Non compulsory elections seem to be won by those who can encourage the largest number of people to get out there and vote.
I'm not sure which system is better.
Re:No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No Worries (Score:5, Insightful)
These tories have been warned, enact this legislation and they will be destroyed politically. Harper won't be able to run for village mayor after we're through with him.
But it does show in majority governments in Canada, they are term dictators. The senate is nothing more than old patronage buddies collecting big bucks to rubber stamp things. But fortunately we are in a minority government situation which makes the dictatorship more tenuous.
Re:Canada is a democracy (Score:4, Insightful)
And to those of you who think this is rhetorical:
In the 60's, one presidential candidate supported a guaranteed income of 1,200$ per year minimum to every citizen, regardless of whether they worked or not. (That was enough to buy a new Mustang convertible back then). That same candidate supported government price fixing for all major commodities, and worked hard to establish closer ties with a major communist country once elected. That candidate had a plan to fix up decaying inner cities that would have assigned up to five union carpenters, electricians and plumbers just to training roles for each new laborer inducted from the local areas into those unions, with most of the actual work being done by the local hires (and this plan failed to be implemented only because the unions wanted even more trainers per new hire and another politician promised them up to a 17 to 1 ratio). That same candidate ran on a promise to pull troops out of an unpopular war, and did so. He set time tables for withdrawing and winding down the war in many cases, and was widely characterized as being out of touch to the far, far right when he insisted upon keeping even some of his plans for withdrawing secret.
That candidate was Richard Nixon, the guy seen then as moderately right of center only because Barry Goldwater was 'even farther right'. By todays standards, Nixon would score about as far left as Dennis Kucinich or Ted Kennedy, maybe even farther.
Re:Facebook group counts ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Caveat: There's a lot that I don't know well, but I'm going to spout off about some of it anyway.
Have we really entered an age where the number of names on a petition are used as some kind of measure?
Of course a petition is "some kind of measure" - and that's hardly new. At the very least, it's a list of people who DIDN'T tell the petition writer to f*** off. It would be shocking if petitions had become some kind of final arbitrating value, or were given equal credence as polls, or letter writing campaigns, or the ultimate poll - voting.
Obviously petitions can't be given any kind of absolute authority, but still they indicate that there's more than one crazy with a vote out there that might hate you. That's worth considering, if you're in politics. And a Facebook group doesn't end with the petition - there are 90,000 communicating to each other, receiving updates, and already connected in case someone wants to mobilize on the issue. It's certain that most of them won't - but it's also certain that many of them will.
You should see the look on peoples faces when I tell them that the Bell Canada is promoting a new feature on their PVR which would be illegal under the new law. Or that the proposed law is such that the record labels will have the teeth to decide which CDs they can copy to their MP3s. Mostly, all I need to say is "like the American DMCA, and maybe worse", and the light goes on. On every petition are names of people who will work damn hard to sway votes when the time comes ... a large petition or Facebook group is something an intelligent politician must consider. It is a measure of collective will in the voting populace.
And unlike the "One Million Potato Lovers Can't Be Wrong" groups, this one hasn't just popped up and filled right away - it's been growing steadily over weeks, which hints to me and may suggest to a politico that people are considering the issues and getting on board. Those people might have decided to vote based on the issue. It's not final, it's not quantifiable, but it's also not insignificant.
Specifically to the significance of this petition/group - there's a Canadian federal election coming (not yet announced, but imminent). It's going to be nasty. They're going to be measuring and gauging the collective sensibility by every marker they can get their hands on.
Re:No Worries (Score:4, Insightful)
I've actually some talk of "None of the Above" as a choice, and if that gets the plurality of votes, then a new election has to be run with a different slate of candidates. In Canada, at least, one of the big flaws is that the political parties hold far too much power over individual candidates, and I think allowing the possibility that the chosen candidate might not only lose, but might actually lose to "None of the Above" might reduce the sometimes very unholy power that political parties hold over candidates.