Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Canadian IP Lobby Calls For ACTA, SOPA & Warrantless Search

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the going-for-the-gusto dept.

Canada 129

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.

cancel ×

129 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

WTF?!!? (5, Funny)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257363)

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!

Re:WTF?!!? (2)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257665)

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.

Re:WTF?!!? (3, Insightful)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257893)

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

Re:WTF?!!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257919)

But then someone with the wrong views on abortion might get elected!

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258161)

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?

Re:WTF?!!? (2)

s.petry (762400) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258637)

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 [wikipedia.org] 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.

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259249)

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.

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

garbut (1990152) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260723)

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

Re:WTF?!!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259453)

Parent is a paid shill for the IP lobby, as proven by his attempts to discredit IP reform by linking it to 9/11 conspiracy bullshit.

Re:WTF?!!? (0)

s.petry (762400) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259791)

I'm a paid shill? or the post I replied to? Have you looked in to any facts yourself, or have you just taken the media's word for everything you currently hold as true.

Need proof that Obama is a paid liar? How about when he was running for office and stated in several speeches that NAFTA had to go. During which time, he was emailing the Canadian prime minister saying 'don't worry, it's just rhetoric'. It was exposed, and covered up by corporate medial.

That was not the first lie, but the easiest to prove. His whole platform was a ruse. What has changed since he has been in office? Less liberty, more executive orders diminishing your rights, increased taxes, increased corruption, and quite honestly more open corruption. How about the increases in violence, the Presidential Hit list, the nameless drone killings, the war mongering for Africa and Iran. They wave it in your face every day. They are taunting you and teasing you, but you are to goddamn ignorant to see what's going on.

You claim 9/11 conspiracy bullshit, but have you checked a single fact for yourself or have you only listened to what paid for corporate media has told you?

Did you buy in to the whole "These are jobs American's won't do" rhetoric? Did you ever stop to think that these are jobs American's have always done, and have been willing to do? That it was an illegal excuse to keep open borders and undermine the American economy?

Wholly shit the list could go on and on and on.

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

garbut (1990152) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260681)

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.

Re:WTF?!!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259665)

One does not take back the media by climbing aboard the Alex Jones crazy train. Jones cannot do much as fart without imagining that the the Jews and the negro in chief are plotting to bring him to a FEMA death camp in order to harvest his precious bodily fluids. Read varied sources of news, taking everything with a pinch of salt. Better make that bucket of salt when getting your news from sites whose adverts cater to the survivalist conspiracy nutjobs who will be easily identified by FEMA when they overdo the colloidal silver. Also, question how a Man can expose so many intricately crafted conspiracies of truly world shaking magnitude without ever being bumped off by the same people with the power to have the UN come in to herd us in to death camps? You sir are a fucking joke and as much a problem as the lying bastards in the mainstream media.

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

hazah (807503) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259689)

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).

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

hazah (807503) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259125)

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

Re:WTF?!!? (3, Insightful)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259711)

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.

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260397)

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.

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#40261259)

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

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

Re:WTF?!!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258395)

How about just "no lobbying the governemt" by corporations or special interest groups or anyone? No more giving dinners, trips, perks, election contributions or bribes to the politicians.

Corporate interests can join in round-table discussions with government and stakeholders prior to legislation being introduced. Everyone gets a chance to see the pros and cons, all above the table with no backroom deals.

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

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

hazah (807503) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259707)

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

See the problem?

Re:WTF?!!? (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260915)

Chips in asses has already been done [wikipedia.org] .

Who needs... (5, Insightful)

MitchDev (2526834) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257371)

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

Re:Who needs... (3, Insightful)

dubbreak (623656) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258495)

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.

Re:Who needs... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260973)

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

Hey there. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257373)

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

get off my internet! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257379)

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.

Re:get off my internet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257657)

This is the problem with representative democracies. The same people can keep bringing up the same stuff over and over again, until they get what they want. There is no "ok Freeze this in place" mechanism. In particular, there isn't a way to say if "I'm not voting, I want no change". Not voting means "do whatever you want, I don't care".

The price of being free is being eternally vigilent - you have to protect yourself and your interests actively at all times.

Re:get off my internet! (2)

Em Adespoton (792954) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258421)

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.

Re:get off my internet! (1)

James McGuigan (852772) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258793)

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.

Re:get off my internet! (1)

hazah (807503) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259939)

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

Canadian tax payers demand representation for tax (5, Insightful)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257397)

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.

Re:Canadian tax payers demand representation for t (3, Insightful)

FriendlyLurker (50431) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257887)

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 [nakedcapitalism.com] from their time in power. This is not just a Canada/US phenomena [guardian.co.uk] , and big mainstream media keeps us all fearful and voting for the same clowns time and again. Sigh.

Re:Canadian tax payers demand representation for t (1)

hemo_jr (1122113) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260059)

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?

The US is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257475)

The US is like a big brother who keeps barging into your room and going through
your stuff.

Re:The US is... (1)

hazah (807503) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259987)

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

Warrents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257489)

Every time you see the phrase "someone wants warrentless ", it is a helpful exercise to read it as "someone wants to be able to do whenever they feel like it, with or without cause and accountability".

Re:Warrents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257523)

Stupid me, I forgot that a greater than sign is no good. Should have read "someone wants warrentless $something" and "someone wants to be able to do $something whenever they feel like it, with or without cause and accountability".

Re:Warrents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258053)

I forgot that a greater than sign is no good

You forgot that you're writing html and you have to write the entities for < like so: &lt; The greater than sign works just fine on it's own but you ought to still write it &gt;

Also, you misspelled warrant and warrantless every single time you wrote it.

Probably unlikely (5, Interesting)

MrKevvy (85565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257553)

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.

Re:Probably unlikely (2, Insightful)

silentbrad (1488951) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257949)

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."

Re:Probably unlikely (1)

tbannist (230135) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258243)

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.

Re:Probably unlikely (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40261031)

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.

Re:Probably unlikely (1)

Rudeboy777 (214749) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258199)

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.

Re:Probably unlikely (5, Funny)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258325)

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.

Re:Probably unlikely (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259211)

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% [wikipedia.org] of 61.1% [elections.ca] 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.

Re:Probably unlikely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259921)

Unfortunately, as time moves on and the public has less and less choice (see: peaceful protest outlawed, "free speech zones" and the like) violent revolution becomes the only other choice.

I wish it werent so, but when the other side is making all the rules, a few legislative changes can make any kind of action or wording that goes against the government entirely illegal.

Re:Probably unlikely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260317)

Unfortunately, as time moves on and the public has less and less choice (see: peaceful protest outlawed, "free speech zones" and the like) violent revolution becomes the only other choice.

Canada is a long way off from that yet. Anyone already anticipating "violent revolution", IMO, is grasping for a rationalization, and this happens to be their reason of the moment; if it wasn't this, it would be something -anything- else. They are the same dipshits tossing moltov cocktails during peaceful marches. They're going out of their way to help create the violent/oppressive environment they crave. Which is unfortunate, because our democracy provides all kinds of avenues & outlets for these kinds of destructive personalities.
No, anyone promoting violent action, already, has no inclination for democracy; at best I would call them anti-nondemocratic & destructive. I would suggest that such a person find a violent endeavour (some form of fighting, say) and get the urge to hurt/dominate others, out of their system.

Re:Probably unlikely (1)

alexo (9335) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259997)

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 [michaelgeist.ca]

Door-in-the-face technique (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40257557)

Seems like a typical example of door-in-the-face technique.

One year of Harper (5, Interesting)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257579)

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.

Re:One year of Harper (4, Insightful)

SteveFoerster (136027) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257899)

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

Re:One year of Harper (3, Funny)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258347)

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!

lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258995)

fact is the usa is like 12+ years ahead of us on this road ....think 1998 DMCA
and it wont happen people are already rising up all over canada now
even in ontario there are protests starting now....

people have woken up and looked about and they aint liking what they see.
go ahead harper when 5 million people knock on your door you go get every cop in canada and the military
thats only just less then 80K soldiers. and its not the institution we hate its the man and his illegal fraudster govt.

Re:One year of Harper (3, Insightful)

fluffythedestroyer (2586259) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258073)

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.

Re:One year of Harper (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259019)

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.

Re:One year of Harper (1)

fluffythedestroyer (2586259) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259727)

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.

Re:One year of Harper (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260497)

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.

Re:One year of Harper (1)

WebCowboy (196209) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260363)

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.

Re:One year of Harper (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260677)

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.

Re:One year of Harper (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259693)

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).

200 ridings with ...201 investigations ofvotefraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259973)

200 ridings with ...201 investigations of vote fraud
and del maestro is now one of them if not already and i got a letter telling me to go vote at a new place and went good to know my vote didn't count isn't it....
if you don't consider yourself Canadian leave Canada i mean it. if you want to play divisive go elsewhere and i know loads in quebec whom don't think like you in fact ive seen nearly the same writing on a conservative blog where you got nearly no seats....

Re:One year of Harper (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258457)

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.

the harper govt at this rate wont last (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258899)

economically , politically and socially he's done....when the NDP party surpasses you at the end of year one you know your screwed. even the liberals are gaining....in a few weeks and months as this bill gets enacted your gonna see a ton of anger ....while i don't condone violence i can see it coming i warned them and what happened some hollywood model sends body parts to the govt
haha
perfect example why not to pander to these crazy nuts any more.

Re:One year of Harper (1)

WebCowboy (196209) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260037)

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").

The Tree of Liberty (4, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257671)

"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.

Re:The Tree of Liberty (1)

fluffythedestroyer (2586259) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258111)

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.

Re:The Tree of Liberty (3, Informative)

tbannist (230135) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258459)

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.

Re:The Tree of Liberty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260307)

Mulcair, Rae or May?

What are you on crack? Rae was once premier of Ontario. That was disaster.
Mucair will pit west vs east.
May is an idiot.

Ya I know... posting AC.

Re:The Tree of Liberty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258531)

...right now, who can lead Canada better than Harper ?That is a good question.

No, that is a silly question. Just about anyone with moderate intelligence and a sense of fair play would be able to outshine Harper in the role of PM.

Re:The Tree of Liberty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40261287)

The problem is getting someone with moderate intelligence, and a sense of fair play elected.

I've already told my wife next election I am volunteering and doing what ever I can to stop the PC part from being elected in my riding.

Re:The Tree of Liberty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259231)

"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. ....

Egads - Can't you take a joke? Thomas Jefferson was not calling for civil disobedience, he was calling civil disobedience horsesh*t.

And an acid belching mutant pony (1)

istartedi (132515) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257827)

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.

Re:And an acid belching mutant pony (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258445)

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

Do While... (5, Insightful)

mk1004 (2488060) | more than 2 years ago | (#40257963)

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.

Re:Do While... (3, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258215)

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.

Re:Do While... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258583)

Still waiting for step 3: Public outcry or decent actually forces the government to enact legislation making it a federal offense punishable by up to 20 years in maximum security prison or death to repeatedly attempt to enact the same legislation more than once every 10 years for no pressing reason as it is subverting the will of the people and is tantamount to treason as such.

Sorry but I honestly think the only way we are going to get our government back is by forcing them to take us seriously though. We shouldn't be the ones who have to fear our government as law-abiding citizens (well as law abiding as you can be considering they are attempting to turn everyone into criminals anyways), they should be the ones fearing US.

Captcha: Profits

Re:Do While... (1)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 2 years ago | (#40259047)

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.

Re:Do While... (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260009)

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.

life's gonna be so cyberpunk (1)

KingBenny (1301797) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258045)

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

Good sign (1)

oneandoneis2 (777721) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258057)

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.

1984? (1)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258109)

Sounds like the Canadians finally read the book.

Let me say sorry for your predicament. (1)

Paracelcus (151056) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258117)

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!

Re:Let me say sorry for your predicament. (3, Insightful)

Lucky75 (1265142) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258301)

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.

Long-term solution (1)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258361)

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.

This is why I don't support the student protesters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258407)

All that momentum and energy they have, with protests and marches and the occaisonal violence happening every day, for over 100 days now, and for what? To keep tuition unrealistically cheap. I wish that social unrest could be used for something far more important, such as Harper's "anti-crime" legislation.

Our nukes (1)

Flipstylee (1932884) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258417)

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".

Re:Our nukes (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258925)

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?

Conservative - You keep using that word... (2)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 2 years ago | (#40258557)

...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.

united hackers association calls for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258861)

united hackers association calls for all people asking for sopa ACTA and warrantless laws to be rounded up and put in an arena where will have a pack a chihuahua's that aint been feed in a 4 weeks let loose on them
we also ask that all copyright is abolished ZERO years and patents are reduced to 10 years, and asking an illegal govt to do your bidding is just gonna make it all that worse for what comes after
were gonna turf this shits and then were coming for you
after all that model that cut up that guy is part fo the hollywood industry all we need is more nuts like him having more free time to sit around get wasted and dream of ways to harm more people.

in other words
GO FUCK YOURSELF

Self-serving post? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258863)

My guess is that the original anonymous poster is Michael Geist, looking for hits on his blog. Also, I think he/you meant to say "most extreme IP policy document" - extremist is a noun.

This is with us being good... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40258869)

"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/ [michaelgeist.ca]

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

Ahh, now we have a name of our enemy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259501)

The Canadian IP Council. Write that down fellow Canucks. The Canadian IP Council.

Who owns it, runs it, funds it, is employed by it. What did they have for breakfast. Where is their headquarters. Who are the local media that will be covering the protest I am going to organize.

First step is identification. Second step is to acquire intelligence. Step Three? Not sure, but step two will keep me busy until I can think up a step three. Maybe step three will be obvious after step two is finished.

Somebody good with the Facebook and the Twitter can start the Anti-Canadian IP Council page thingie. Just grab a piece. Do whatever you can. Don't do anything illegal. A little bit of pressure from a thousand points with no central command or structure will be effective.

Re:Ahh, now we have a name of our enemy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260617)

Nothing illegal, but "playing dirty": use the "treason"/nationalism card in the newspapers.

Is what this Canadian IP Council does, to the benefit of the Canadian people? No? Could it be that it's paid for by foreign interests (furtively glances to the south) to subvert Canadian legislation to their benefit instead of that of the Canadians?

Your mr. Harper may be a Conservative, but is he a "pro-Canadian" Conservative or a "let's do an Anschluß [wikipedia.org] with the USA" type of Conservative.

The best defence is a good offence... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259837)

... and boy, are this bunch offensive.

the hunt is on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40259911)

time to start hunting these fuckers. taking a few out will have the rest of these cunts scrambling for cover and shutting the fuck up.

How quickly will others rush to our aid? (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40260025)

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.

Re:How quickly will others rush to our aid? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260273)

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.

First Canadian Assasinations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260145)

Assasination can be seen as the ultimate 'un-Diplomatic Act'. It usually follows a series of other un-Diplomatic acts, such as bill C-30. The current Canadian government has done a lot of craphead things in the past few months. They are a one-term government. If they try to push this through, it may well be a lot less than one term. Just sayin'.

Mark these Cocksuckers off the ballot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260343)

No more of these pieces of shit. Next motherfucker introducing another fucking bill should have their political career ended.

PS: still no fucking banksters arrested

With a computer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40260885)

All this with a computer bs needs to stop. A man in my local area ran down and killed an elderly woman while driving under the influence of alcohol. He was given 2-4 years. If you get caught "infringing copyrights" you are looking at 10+ years. This is rediculous!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?