Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Your Rights Online

Lobby Groups Launch Full Assault For Canadian DMCA 135

Posted by Soulskill
from the sneak-it-through-while-everyone's-watching-playoff-hockey dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Bill C-61, the previous attempt at a Canadian DMCA, may have failed, but it is clear that the music, movie, and business software industries are engaged in putting massive pressure on the Canadian government to bring it back. Lobbying records show several meetings each week with Government Ministers for CRIA, CMPDA, and Microsoft over the past month. Meanwhile, the CRIA is preparing a grassroots campaign in support of new copyright laws, even claiming that the current rules are costing jobs to truck drivers delivering CDs and DVDs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lobby Groups Launch Full Assault For Canadian DMCA

Comments Filter:
  • I thought that distribution was supposed to be moving towards being done over the net anyways. Tough to say if new copyright laws will be able to be pushed through anyways right now, what with the minority government and all right now.
    • by Delkster (820935)
      Yeah, and as we all know, the Internet is not a big truck.
    • Re:Truck Drivers? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by erroneus (253617) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @08:14AM (#27625667) Homepage

      If these people are having THAT many meetings with government officials, they aren't talking about whether or not it will happen, but HOW it will happen.

      It must be stopped. A TV campaign must be put on the air stating what happened in the U.S. and how it was passed and that the same law had failed in Canada but they haven't given up. People need to know what demon they are attempting to give birth to and how it harms the people.

  • Jobs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wellington Grey (942717) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @02:21AM (#27624141) Homepage Journal
    even claiming that the current rules are costing jobs to truck drivers delivering CDs and DVDs.

    You know what costs jobs? Technological change -- it's a good thing.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by davester666 (731373)

      But the tubes have to go a longer way here in Canada, so the cable and telephone monopolies naturally made them smaller. That's why we have bandwidth caps. That's why we still need truck drivers to deliver physical media!

      • Re:Jobs (Score:4, Funny)

        by Jane Q. Public (1010737) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @02:46AM (#27624235)
        See... you backwards Canadians. They made the tubes out of metal, didn't they? They could have made the tubes smaller, and made them out of glass. Glass tubes are more slippery and let the packets go through faster.

        Though I admit that a moose could probably do more damage stumbling over a glass tube than a metal one.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by EdIII (1114411) *

          Glass tubes are more slippery and let the packets go through faster.

          Don't forget that they need to be straight, or on a very gradual curve. Otherwise the 1's and 0's can start clogging up the tubes, especially if its looped.

        • by gwait (179005)

          Actually our tubes are made from hollowed out pine beetle infested logs, so they tend to leak bits on the ground.

          Unfortunately those bits have combined with woodbugs and become self aware..

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      Fuck! Time to burn all those computers to ensure more accountant, science, mathmatics, physics, secretarial jobs don't get "lost".

    • Re:Jobs (Score:5, Funny)

      by Naturalis Philosopho (1160697) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @02:53AM (#27624271)
      Technological change is most definitely not a good thing. Those stinking truck drivers and their trucks have ruined my career as a stage coach driver!
      • You stage coach drivers and your fancy wheels! I had a perfectly good career delivering CDs on a mule.
      • by canuck57 (662392)

        Technological change is most definitely not a good thing. Those stinking truck drivers and their trucks have ruined my career as a stage coach driver!

        Then become a politician! Heck, $200,000 a year partially tax free with an expense account that isn't quoestion too much. You even get the air miles! You want a riding on the Westjet route, nicer looking ladies. Even has job security and pension is only 6 years and government backed. Maybe a little cash extra under the table too. And you can use CCRA to find out where to hide your money from the tax man. Get good inside investment tips to from Goodale.

        A dream job...

    • You did leave out the most important part: ...because it creates even more new jobs.

      People think that closing down companies with outdated business models only destroys jobs. But they never seem to see, that in nature, available resources always are used again quickly. Someone else will fill the whole. Pressure equalizes. And the people will find work again. And sometimes, wonderful things happen too. Like someone of those people having the time and motivation to start his own successful company with someth

    • The past: Technology has created the horseless carrige. Physical items are moved around more effieciently. Horseshoe repairmen are out of jobs

      The present: Technology has created the digital age. Information is reproduced and spread about more efficiently. The middlemen who use to reproduce (making records/cds) and spread (market and distribute) this information are losing their jobs.

      The furture: Technology has created a device that clones physical items like food. Physical items are reproduced more efficien

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Simple fix: faster broadband, then re-train the DC truck drivers into hard disk truck drivers.

    • by Z00L00K (682162)

      And soon they will transport solid state disks instead.

      The catch with copyright laws is that the amount of fair use seems to be cut down bit by bit for every new release.

      I'm still of the opinion that there shall be limitations on copyright:

      • Copyright to expire five years after the creator's death.
      • Copyright can only be held by creator as a person, not by a company and never be transferred to another person.
      • If you organize a religion you shall not be able to claim copyright on any works related to the religion
      • I think you should amend your last point. If you organise a religion, and claim tax relief, you should not be able to claim copyright on works related to the religion. I don't give a fuck if some nutjob wants to copyright their cult texts but it becomes a different story when they are receiving government subsidy.
      • by mpe (36238)
        I'm still of the opinion that there shall be limitations on copyright:
        * Copyright to expire five years after the creator's death.


        How about 5 years after first publication subject to depositing an unencrypted copy with any applicable copyright libraries. "Starting the clock" with the creator's death has all sorts of problems like what happens where there is more than one "creator" as well as even finding out when someone dies (especially if they used a alias).

        * Copyright can only be held by creator as a
  • by Wacky_Wookie (683151) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @02:26AM (#27624157) Homepage Journal

    If these media companies keep this shit up, I think a lot of creative people will stop providing them with content.

    It would be fun to form a mass co-op type business, pool everyone's cash and buy up as many band contracts as possible just to keep them off the major labels.

    • You are a bit late. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Jane Q. Public (1010737) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @02:57AM (#27624291)
      A number of popular names have started doing that already. Nine Inch Nails, Radiohead, and lots more.
      • by Wacky_Wookie (683151) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @03:16AM (#27624369) Homepage Journal

        Yes, I know, and I think it is a step in the right direction. The thing is that Radiohead, N.I.N. and co. all went through the "system" first. I can't wait till a significant portion of the worlds popular artists have NEVER had a major label contract. Labels may never die completely, but they will be left with the Britney Spears and Jonas Brothers markets only, and even then they really won't care about music sales, as all the profit in that market is merchandise anyway.

        A membership based record store would be interesting, kind of like the old Colombia House mail order thing, put a physical store. Charge a flat-rate for membership, then have the music for sale at 75% off. If you made it so everyone got one free CD a month, I bet a lot of people would pick up a few albums just 'cus they were in the store anyway to get their "Free" CD.

        • is that the recording companies can no longer force people to buy a whole album (CD) to get one or two good songs. People are paying a buck or so for individual songs, and just passing up the bad ones. So the recording companies' revenue goes down proportionately... as it should. But they want to keep forcing you to buy a CD.

          The old model of "let's spend millions promoting this artist, then sell 6 million CDs at $20 each" just won't wash anymore. But they don't want to accept that. Well, that makes them
          • by Wacky_Wookie (683151) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @03:31AM (#27624447) Homepage Journal

            Oh I completely agree!

            I think the other bonus now is that artists are (or will) be working harder at making a whole album again since people CAN buy single songs on iTunes/online now. Live show are getting better again too. I detect more effort being put into live shows now at ALL levels of musical fame. The whole concept of playing live only because you are supporting and promoting an album is pretty silly for most types of music anyway.

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by epine (68316)

            can no longer force people to buy a whole album (CD) to get one or two good songs

            Yeah, you just want that Money song, they charge you the moon.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I found this Jamendo site recently, free music from independant artists...50% of advertising revenue goes to artists and 100% of all donations made.

          Sounds like workable model.

          Will be curious how it all turns out.

        • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Have you seen www.magnatunes.com [magnatunes.com]?

      • It's an admirable effort. Unfortunately the industry can always go find the next teen sensation... with a few hundred thousand bucks worth of marketing, they seem to be able to sell anyone's crap these days.
    • by what about (730877) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @03:18AM (#27624379) Homepage

      But thanks to copyright extended to more than a life after the artist death, RIAA will enjoy money anyway.

      However, I think that the only way to wake up the "common person" to the current abuse of copyright by RIAA is for RIAA to be even more abusive.
      History tell us that only after tyrants have done truly outrageus act then the people will stand up, not earlier (unfortunately).

      Enjoy your music :-)

      • by Kabuthunk (972557)

        Unfortunately, I honestly don't believethat even after a "truly outrageous act", the people will do anything whatsoever. They will continue to vote for the same people, and let whatever happens... happens. At least I voted for one of the 'non-typical' parties that might not be going along with things so readily. They got zero seats. So my opinions are meaningless to society anyway it seems.

        Not that it matters... I believe all parties will roll over for big-money, regardless of their actual goals and/or

    • by sumdumass (711423) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @04:48AM (#27624689) Journal

      Actually, it's not the media companies.

      The problem is that the last two WIPO treaties require DMCA style laws. Pretty much any country that doesn't implement those will end up being passed over in other crap that the international community does. It will hurt trade and cause financial issues.

      The American DMCA provisions are more or less taken straight from the requirements of the WIPO Copyright Treaty or WTC [wipo.int] and the WPPT or WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty [wipo.int] with the exception of penalties and a few extremes. Canada signed onto both of the treaties on 12/22/1997. Focusing on the media companies will only result in disappointed losses in the fight. You need to get the government (your local government as well as other country's governments) to change the treaties and international obligations to them to reflect the will of your people.

      You or I or anyone can complain about Disney or Warner bros or whatever. They are as powerful as they are in this fight because they are attempting to get the governments of countries to make good on treaties that almost all countries in the world have signed an obligation to. It's the reason that the pirate bay just got into trouble, it's the reason why their laws are being changed and why charges were being brought against a group of people on the behalf of people and corporations that most likely don't even have offices in the country.

      Sure, keep believing media corps are evil. I'm not asking you or anyone else to embrace them. I'm asking people to actually pay attention to where this crap is coming from so that we don't dick around with seemingly related issues that end up being a dead end. The treaties need to be adjusted-changes-destroyed-whatever before this threat goes away. When I can say Canada or any other country has to pass a law because a treaty they signed obligated them to, no matter how much it looks like I am the bad guy, I'm more or less only reminding those countries of their obligations.

      It would be fun to form a mass co-op type business, pool everyone's cash and buy up as many band contracts as possible just to keep them off the major labels.

      While it would be fun, that's all it would be "for fun". Or at least until the right crap was changed out. Even if "big media" had no clients, they could/would still push for the treaties to be implemented.

      • Actually, there's nothing wrong with the treaties. The issue is with the implementation of the laws by the governments.

        For instance, the U.S. DMCA would be a reasonable law, if it actually had some penalties for misuse. As it is, various companies have routinely abused the DMCA (using it for trademarks, sending a new DMCA notice after a counter notice has been filed, etc).

        The *only* penalty for misuse specified in the law is a possible charge of perjury for an attorney - a penalty that will never be appli

        • by sumdumass (711423)

          Well, while I agree that the implementation needs work, it's the lack of "direction" the treaties offer and the quality of politicians nowadays generally means we won't get much more then they have to give. That does mean laws like the DMCA that doesn't really consider abuse.

          Anyways, the treaties could clear a lot of the issues we are seeing up with a well rounded minimum set of "fair use" or "fair dealings" guidelines that allow for the environment to exist in which we see a lot of the abuses. Seriously, i

      • by dimeglio (456244)

        I believe Taiwan has not signed the WIPO treaties and are doing just fine. In fact, they are booming economically. They remain very creative even if they have mastered the art of reproducing originals at a lesser cost (or bootlegging).

        • by sumdumass (711423)

          Your right. However, is Taiwan attempting to pass DMCA stile laws? Taiwan may be the exception to the observation but look at where they are attempting to implement the laws.

          This is not only interesting but an important note because when we look at who is making laws, or should I say which countries seem to be getting laws shot down with massive outcry of the populous at the last minute, we will see a lot of names who are signatories to the treaties but not enforcing them. Let me list a few along with when

      • If this is the case we're even more screwed. I'm sure the same groups of companies represented by the lobbiest have already discussed their reasons to each of the WIPO members that have signed the treaty. Our only opportunity for some sanity in this is to write to our MPs and the Prime Minister to demand fair consume, Internet and technology oriented copyright laws.

        I want more openness in all Canadian government affairs. I want cameras w/ sound - all real time and no editing- of any and all of the 'closed d

        • by sumdumass (711423)

          Right on.

          However, I just interupted my extended fight with naval gazing and participated in a thought experiment where I looked at some of the countries [slashdot.org] who have signed onto but not ratified or implemented [wipo.int] the WIPO treaties. [wipo.int] Look at the contracting parties [wipo.int] sections.

          Anyways, the interesting thing is that the US ratified and implemented the DMCA laws pretty early in the game but the EU and countries like England, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, and so on who's population seem to think the US is pushing

    • by Mashiki (184564)

      It already is. More people in Canada are connected online and get their information from it then watch the TV. It trends even more deeply in the winter when we're not outside and freezing our asses off. Watching hockey or doing some other wintery sport, or sometimes just doing something inside.

      The belief that Canadians will roll over for this are sadly true, unless it affects them directly it won't make too much of a difference. However, small numbers of people can make a large impact. It's getting the

  • Maybe its time for a global over arching consumer group on a par with RIAA, to coordinate a global push back. RIAA and its associated entities besides having the cash have better global coordination. There seem to be disparate consumer type groups that operate country by country, lacking cash and proper media profiles... Just a though anyway
    • And I bet you haven't contributed anything to them either. Well, get off your butt and go here:

      https://secure.eff.org/site/Donation2?idb=138949259&df_id=1220&1220.donation=form1 [eff.org]

      to contribute. The page says "End Warrantless Wiretapping!" but it is actually a membership page. Sign the hell up and give them some money. You are not limited to their fixed amounts, they will take any donation.
      • but I imagine that if they got enough support from Canadians, they would help there, too. I don't know of any reason why not.
        • by Your.Master (1088569) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @03:39AM (#27624467)

          I can definitely think of reasons they wouldn't help in Canada, not the least of which is an entirely different legal framework within which to fight, where the US constitution does not apply and your legal rights are different (greater in some areas, lesser in others).

          But, anyway, they do support a Canadian organization:

          http://www.onlinerights.ca/ [onlinerights.ca]

          Not formally affiliated but they are more or less the Canadian equivalent. The EFF defends rights in the US constitution which simply do not (legally) apply in Canada. The EFC defends those laid out in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

          That said, both of the organisations come with baggage that is not really related to the RIAA (for example, Warrantless Wiretapping). If you want to support them in opposition to the RIAA, make sure they don't disagree with you on some important principle. This goes generally for any activist or charity cause, but I feel it's important to call out that it's not a single-issue organisation.

          • But they don't... at least the EFF doesn't, I don't know about EFC. In any case, the EFF has been staunchly adversarial to the RIAA and just about everything they are doing.
      • This is great advice. I donate what I can every year. If even a tenth of the Slashdot visitor population did the same, I'd feel a lot better about things.
  • Then maybe the media levy that is currently distributed amongst artists should also be distributed to truckers too?

    Problem solved.

    Long story short, Canada doesn't have a copyright problem. Tweak the levies if you want, but don't blow a good thing. DMCA style laws haven't worked anywhere else they've been implemented. The Canadian levy system shows far more promise. Heck, maybe the U.S. should be adopting our levy system instead of trying to make us adopt their horribly broken and ineffectual laws!
    • by timmarhy (659436) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @03:08AM (#27624337)
      the levy system most certainly doesn't work. you end up paying for something you don't want. I, for example don't ever wish to purchase a top 40 cd. but due to the levy system if i purchased a blank cd in canada my money would be funneled directly to the very people i don't want it to even through i've never downloaded anything that belongs to them.

      yes, perfect system indeed.

      • by skreeech (221390)

        The blank CDs could be packaged up with a little art and levies(levi?) going to the source that you most like to download. Gotta stay honest though and buy spindle for both your porn and underground music.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        the levy system most certainly doesn't work. you end up paying for something you don't want. I, for example don't ever wish to purchase a top 40 cd. but due to the levy system if i purchased a blank cd in canada my money would be funneled directly to the very people i don't want it to even through i've never downloaded anything that belongs to them.

        yes, perfect system indeed.

        Conversly, after buying blank CDs I remember to go download big label music.

      • by djmurdoch (306849)

        I, for example don't ever wish to purchase a top 40 cd. but due to the levy system if i purchased a blank cd in canada my money would be funneled directly to the very people i don't want it to even through i've never downloaded anything that belongs to them.

        This is not very accurate. Your money will go to the copyright collective, and be distributed by it. 60% goes to the songwriters and publishers, 23% to Canadian performers, and 17% to Canadian record companies (actually mostly subsidiaries of multinationals). The distribution depends on airplay and sales, so Canadian top 40 artists will get more money than obscure ones, but most of the top 40 performers aren't Canadian, so they'll get none of it. (Whoever owns the rights to their songs will get a share, th

        • by gwait (179005)

          You might argue successfully that the way they divide up the money is reasonable, but that doesn't change the fact that it is an unfair tax/welfare system that gives signed musicians special status over other industries in Canada.

          It also presumes guilt on the part of anyone who buys a blank CD, which is also just plain wrong.

          We can chose a path of tax and spend to support obsolete industries and business models, or we could let them die and make way for new business models.

          There is nothing in anyone's chart

          • by djmurdoch (306849)

            It also presumes guilt on the part of anyone who buys a blank CD, which is also just plain wrong.

            Not at all. It presumes that some of those will be *legally* used to make private copies of music.

            Now, this is arguably unfair: some people will buy a bunch of CDRs and use them for things that are completely unrelated to music covered by the private copying right. However, it's not as unfair as it used to be: you can use recordable DVDs now instead, and you don't pay a levy on them.

            But it doesn't really matter, because the levy is on its last legs. I doubt it will survive the next update to the Copyri

      • Heck, I have over 300 CDs. Of those, save for 8 albums from 4 different artists, the rest of my collection is American. Sorry, but Canadian music sucks. Most of the Canadian artists that make it to the top 40 copy the same style as the Americans.

        The overwhelming reason for CANCON and the Levy are, if you buy the story, is to share our 'Canadian culture' with other Canadians and the rest of the world. Can anybody point to me exactly what is "Canadian" about Canadian music? I've yet to see any coherent defin

    • by Scamwise (174654)

      They should also make sure they guy with the price sticker machine gets his cut, I hate to see him injured by piracy.

    • WE aren't trying to get you to adopt our laws!!! Excuse me, but those are YOUR OWN companies doing that. WE don't like the DMCA any more than you do. It was sneaked past us (or most of us anyway), when we weren't looking.

      And it is true that the DMCA doesn't work worth a damn, except to make things more difficult for the consumer. On the other hand, the levy system (as it has been proposed here, anyway) would not work either, since it collects money from honest people to pay for the activities of dishone
      • by gwait (179005)

        I don't blame you, but none of the actual Canadian record companies are for the Canadian version of a DMCA and have come out publicly against it.

        It has been reported that the US trade people basically threatened Canada with a trade war if Canada didn't crack down on the "rampant" piracy in our country. As well, apparently many US professional lobbyists are in Ottawa cozying up to our federal politicians.

        There is very little broadcast or newspaper coverage about it since the traditional Canadian news media i

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by palegray.net (1195047)
      I don't know if paying an extra tax on recordable media counts as a "system that works."
    • by sumdumass (711423)

      Unfortunately, the biggest problem with this situation is ill/mis informed or the lack of informed people.

      The DMCA laws extend directly from the WPPT and WCT treaties (wipo)and Canada signed them in december of 1997 but hasn't implemented them yet. This is actually where the US originally got the DMCA from too. Now you can argue all you want that the media companies cause the treaties to have the wording and all that, I won't dispute it. The issue currently on the table is that many different countries are

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by djmurdoch (306849)

        Signing the treaty doesn't create the obligation, it's ratifying it that does. Canada signed those treaties, but hasn't ratified them. It's like the US position regarding the Kyoto Protocol, or the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: signed, but not ratified, so not bound by the terms of the treaty.

        • by sumdumass (711423)

          The obligation isn't as much ratifying it as it is economic advantages of being party to the treaty. Like I said, your fighting the wrong fights. But hey, don't listen to me and continue griping every 6 months or so when it comes back up again and again because politicians in Canada see it as somehow beneficial to get on board with most of the rest of the world every time the entertainment industry of any country brings it to their attention.

          BTW, I didn't say Canada was obligated to them, I said many other

  • Here's an idea... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by symbolic (11752) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @03:19AM (#27624383)

    Stop funding them. More and more artists are starting to see the light - that even if they give away their new albums online, and make their money via live concerts, they will *still* make more than they are through these usurious contracts they have with Big Media, Inc.

    If people would just stop buying RIAA-produced crap (and stop stealing it!), the problem would eventually solve itself. It's no secret that they'll need to be dragged kicking and screaming back to this thing we all know as 'reality,' but it's gotta happen sooner or later. Right now we're just prolonging the agony for everyone.

    • by dangitman (862676)

      If people would just stop buying RIAA-produced crap (and stop stealing it!), the problem would eventually solve itself.

      That doesn't really work. Sure, stop crap releases from artists signed to a RIAA label. But that doesn't stop sales for the good artists signed to RIAA labels, of which there are plenty.

      Do you really mean "stop buying crap and good releases from RIAA-signed artists"?

      • by symbolic (11752)

        Yes, I do. The artists aren't blameless here if they refuse to be part of the solution. They resist this kind of change for the same reason that the RIAA does - they don't want to risk disruption of the money pipeline. At that point I'd have to wonder what their real objective is - to be artistic and create, or to maximize the money they get for doing it.

    • by mpe (36238)
      If people would just stop buying RIAA-produced crap (and stop stealing it!),

      If a significent number of people did stop buying it then they'd have their lobbiests claim that this was "proof" of piracy to try and get more extreme laws passed.

      the problem would eventually solve itself.

      How much damage will be done before that happens?
      • by symbolic (11752)

        I see this argument all the time - to be honest, it's nothing but a way to rationalize the status quo. I have no doubt that they'd try something like this, but they're doing to have one hell of a time proving it.

  • by skreeech (221390) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @03:30AM (#27624443)

    Fewer trucks on the road and fewer CDs being smelted cannot possibly be a bad thing in the big picture. Not a big impact but would positive contribution if it was not BS trying to pass a law.

  • The CRIA and CMPDA don't seem to understand is that the basis of the business law in Canada requires that when you pay for something, you get something in return. Either a physical form, a license, or a service.

    When you buy a product, you have complete ownership of that product to do with what you want. Now the companies can set what the warranty covers, but they can't control what you do with it.

    Because of the greed of the Music and Film industries this wasn't going to work for them because they wanted
  • They treat this like it's a matter of national security.

    For goodness sake, it's entertainment!

    Why can't they focus this hard on things that actually matter to the health and success of their people?

    Of course we in the US are just as guilty.

    • by Dunbal (464142)

      They treat this like it's a matter of national security.

      For goodness sake, it's entertainment!

      Some would argue that it's not even entertainment... more like - "torture"?

      I certainly stopped going to the movies and listening to the radio a long time ago, and not because I'm downloading the content online. The internet IS to blame, but because I have found OTHER forms of entertainment. Here I can laugh at the stupidity of my fellow man (there's no shortage) when I wa

  • A short list of things more important right now:

    Why our troops are in Afganistan (which you say is unwinnable [www.cbc.ca]
    Our Economy
    The Health Care system
    Our relationship with the US and the EU
    Food Safety [www.cbc.ca]

    Your party is slipping in the polls again. Most people will see this as a waste of time and tax payer money, just like last time.

    Sincerely,
    A Canadien Taxpayer

    • by Mashiki (184564)

      You'll see an election in Sept. or so when the economy is really in the toilet. And the Liberals will jump all over passing this. I'm willing to take bets on this now.

  • by Dunbal (464142) on Saturday April 18, 2009 @07:07AM (#27625331)

    even claiming that the current rules are costing jobs to truck drivers delivering CDs and DVDs."

          This is a fun game!

          I will see your "jobless CD and DVD delivering truck drivers", and raise you one "dependence on foreign oil funds terrorism". So see, distributing digital material online actually reduces global terrorism and is thus a "goof thing"! Your move.

  • > ...Government Ministers for CRIA, CMPDA, and Microsoft...

    Canada has a Minister for Microsoft?

  • by Sj0 (472011)

    You know what pisses me off?

    The copyright industry is trying to have it both ways.

    Copyright is supposed to be a partnership between the public and creators. It's supposed to be a 2-way thing.

    As much as the copyright holders love to bitch about how piracy is theft, so is what they're doing. They've stolen 50 years of our culture and locked it away in a vault so they can eke out a few dollars by opening the vault every few years. They're literally stealing money from us every time we buy a CD or hard disk, bu

  • Please Canada take a look at the USA and see how between software patents, the DMCA, and other draconian legislation, our tech sector has been quickly crumbling.
  • What can *I* do? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Internalist (928097)

    I live in Ottawa and want to do something more than write a letter that I know will be ignored to a local MP who I know is not in line with my position anyway. While I'm interested in law & policy as it applies to this domain, it's definitely not in my sphere of knowledge.

    Do /.ers have any suggestions about what I can do to fight this, or good ways to raise awareness?

    • by gwait (179005)

      Actually the last time around many interested people showed up at the minister's office in Calgary to protest Bill C-61, and it totally caught the minister by surprise (Someone cares about this issue?).
      If you can find a local group, you can physically show up and get in the face of the politicians in Ottawa. Also, you could blog/report about local Ottawa news related to this issue which would also be a benefit since the traditional news media have a severe conflict of interest on this subject.

      Start by diggi

    • by rts008 (812749)

      Do /.ers have any suggestions about what I can do to fight this, or good ways to raise awareness?

      Burn down the Capital.
      Doesn't matter whose, yours or mine. (if you go for mine, I'll help)

      signed,
      a US Patriot

      On a serious note, I don't have a good answer for you...we're up to our ears with the same alligators.
      I think it needs to start with massive copyright law reform. Until it gets back to sane levels, this can never be resolved.

  • Maybe someone should tell the CRIA that "grassroots" campaigns coming from paid staffers is called astroturf.

    • by gwait (179005)

      I suspect they already know that, and will sue you for using the word astroturf. Oh damn, I used it too!

  • I don't have a problem with most of the proposals, as long as three criteria are met: 1) that the mere technological circumvention of copy protection does not, by itself, constitute the breaking of any law, including copyright; 2) that copying for personal and private use of the person making the copy always be exempt from infringement, as long as the copy from which the private-use copy was made was not itself infringing; and 3) that if copy protection circumvention must be considered a crime at all, that
  • I wish the MAFIAA good luck.

    Geist has the ear of the main stream media outlets in CA, and will be able to handily shoot down any "arguments" they try to offer to stir up "grass roots" campaigns.

The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.

Working...