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!

Canada's Music Lobby Buys Government Access

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the they-know-who-you've-been-seeing dept.

Music 158

An anonymous reader writes "Copyfighting law professor Michael Geist, who previously uncovered financial links between recording industry lobbyists and Canada's Minister of Canadian Heritage Bev Oda (who is responsible for copyright policy), has now identified what big cash donations will get you. He reports that Oda met with the President of the Canadian Recording Industry Association on a monthly basis last year just as the government was preparing copyright reform legislation and Canadian artists were calling for an end to P2P lawsuits. Is it any wonder that Canadians seem likely to lose their fair use rights?"

cancel ×

158 comments

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

Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (3, Funny)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17753838)

We copy all the best and worse that the US has to offer ... arrrgg ...

Maybe we'll copy the "DRM is a bad idea" that the 'mericans are coming up with now.

While we're at it maybe we could import some backbone and tell Quebec to get stuffed... :-)

Tom

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (2, Insightful)

wondersparrow (685210) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754072)

Isn't it really too bad that DRM itself is not copyrighted to the point that nobody can share its implimentations or policies?

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (4, Funny)

delirium28 (641609) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754078)

Screw that! I say we let Quebec seperate and then move to Quebec for our pirating needs. While they may be vocal, they are also pretty good at keeping rights alive.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754600)

BTW, You're under arrest for violating Quebec's language laws. The police with be at your door in a few minutes to fart in your general direction.

You should know better than advertising Quebec without making French more prominent than English.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755742)

Parent comment is NOT offtopic.
Grandparent comment talks about Quebec preserving rights... Move to Quebec and try to set up a business with an English sign.
You would be in contravention of the law.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756496)

Move to Quebec and try to set up a business with an English sign.

You can put the sign up, but it can't be as big or bigger than the French sign as I understand it. I've never been there, and don't plan to so I couldn't say for sure.

Je Ne Suis Pas D'Flibustier (2)

mfh (56) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755046)

If you suggest that Quebec would tolerate piracy, you have a low opinion of the people of Quebec. One of the main Quebec parties is predominantly conservative, and therefore opposed to fair use (without a financial transaction). If Quebec separated, they would support the interest of publishers over artists or music users.

Re:Je Ne Suis Pas D'Flibustier (1)

i_should_be_working (720372) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755612)

Around here, if someones says that Quebec tolerates piracy, wouldn't that mean they have a high opinion of Quebec? Or did you mean to say that they have an ignorant view of Quebec?

Anyway, what conservative Quebecois party are you talking about? The Bloc always seemed pretty liberal to me.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (2, Informative)

Jonny_eh (765306) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755754)

Quebec is terrible with rights. It is illegal in Quebec to put a sign outside your business in anything but the official language, French. Even if you live in a town where everyone speaks English, you HAVE to use French signs. If you want an English sign too, it's writing must be half the size of the French sign.

You cannot get a job as a civil servant unless you speak French, even if it's a job where no French is required. It is very difficult, and sometimes impossible, to get government forms in any language but French, despite the large English population. If you are an English family, you must send your kids to a French school, unless you went to an English school in Quebec as a child.

It goes on...

Quebec supports rights, my ass!

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

freeweed (309734) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756438)

The Quebec government also has an "approved baby names" list - basically, you have to get PERMISSION from the government as to what you can legally name your own child.

It goes on indeed.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756580)

You cannot get a job as a civil servant unless you speak French, even if it's a job where no French is required.

Isn't that true in all of Canada? It is here in Manitoba.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17756764)


Isn't that true in all of Canada? It is here in Manitoba.

No, its not. And I work for the feds in Winnipeg. Most of the people I work with are unilingual.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754160)

Canadians will do what America tells them to do. That's just how it works out.

Just like the stealthy American Union that Bush and US corporations are secretly spreading through the Americas.

Here is your reading assignment to get caught up:

1) http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0701/08/ldt .01.html [cnn.com]

Search for "DOBBS: Tonight, a proposal for an expanded so-called free trade zone"

2) http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0701/21/ldt w.01.html [cnn.com]

Search for "DOBBS: The Bush administration is pushing, and pushing hard, a partnership among the United States, Mexico and Canada. With a goal of what it calls integration by 2010."

You have been warned! So don't complain once the Americans are running Canada!

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754646)

Relax. It's all just a part of the New World Order(tm). Nothing to see here. Move along.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

neoform (551705) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754298)

Meh, come next elections the liberals will be back in power, they're spineless and will cave under public pressure to get rid of any such drm laws..

Spineless? Probably, but less so than the Cons (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754618)

I recall the Liberals telling Bush NO (on both Iraq and missile "defence") repeatedly under great pressure from conservatives, with Stephen Harper even undermining our government and insulting Canadians [www.ctv.ca] over it. And surprise surprise, what was the first thing Harper did while in government? SURRENDER to the US over lumber, despite the fact that Canada won every decision, sending a BILLION canadian dollars to the US industry in order to pay them to end their illegal actions. Harper is the spineless Bush-ass-licking coward, the liberals stood up to him, keeping us out of the ridiculous Iraq quagmire and defending our interests rather then cow-towing to the republicans.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

phrostie (121428) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755152)

wasn't it a liberal that created the DMCA?

yeah, i believe it was.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (2, Insightful)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755376)

A REAL liberal would never, ever do such a thing. And neither would a true conservative. Don't let mass media re-write the dictionary, or extremists define your language.

It's all government, not just USA/Canada (3, Insightful)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754552)

Don't feel too bad, this is a feature of all government. Where you give government powers over something, that power is inevitably abused [wikipedia.org] . The solution is to limit the responsibility of government. The more areas it becomes responsible for the more areas become corrupted.
 

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

Miseph (979059) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755008)

While we're at it maybe we could import some backbone and tell Quebec to get stuffed... :-)


Please do. Quebecois are just like the asinine American stereotype of real French people... only worse... and not actually French. News flash Quebec: If you want to secede from Canada, you'll need to set up your own health care and money independent of the other provinces... I know you like using theirs, but you really can't once you stop paying taxes to Ottawa and they make it a felony to export any significant quantity of $CDN out of the country.

As for the rest, please accept my sincerest apologies for neo-Conservative politics, the last 20 years of country music, and the film adaptation of "A.I." We suck sometimes.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755688)

News flash Miseph (Trou-du-cul): Quebec has always had their own health care, if Quebec would be receiving the amount of taxes paid to Ottawa, they would be in better shape financially

As for using the $CDN, who cares, let's use the Euro? With comments like those, I understand even more Quebecois who wants to separate, but I guess that there are trou-du-cul everywhere (even in the rest of Canada!)!

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756718)

but you really can't once you stop paying taxes to Ottawa


Once they stop paying taxes to Ottawa, then maybe Alberta will be off the hook for the $16.7 billion (about $2,178 per person) [fin.gc.ca] they pay those traitorous jackasses every year.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (2, Insightful)

GreyPoopon (411036) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755012)

We copy all the best and worse that the US has to offer...
Tom - please note that the following is not directed at you...

Don't go dragging the US into this. This kind of crap goes on in every single government until the citizens of that government do something about it. If you live in a country where you think this doesn't happen, you are either naive or the government doesn't have resort to such tactics because they already have you by the balls. Most government leaders are in office for one of two reason: money or power. Most of them are there for both. Such behavior generally spirals out of control until citizens find a way to harass the perpetrator (maybe through lawsuits) in such a manner that it strikes fear into other politicians, or until there is some sort of uprising that generally results in significant changes to the government that basically reset the situation until it can happen again. Don't believe me? Take a look around at your leaders and their financial situations. How many of them would be considered middle class or lower? How many of them can claim that the greatest portion of their income is from the salary they get as a public servant? Don't get me wrong. There are a few people in politics who really have the citizens in mind, but it's rare.

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755082)

Actually good point. Sorry I didn't mean to disparage the US there. It just seems quite a few of our bad ideas get media attention first in the US (may not specifically start there) like TSA regulations, DMCA ideas, etc...

Although now that some industries in the US are taking a non-DRM stance I'd like to see Canada "copy" that :-)

Tom

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

Weston O'Reilly (1008937) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755184)

Now, when are we here in the States going to import poutine [wikipedia.org] ? Mmm... delicious poutine...

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755240)

Poutine is tasty but sick too. Only proper poutine is worth the calories and sodium, not that shit that "New York Fries" sells eegad that's craptastic.

I wouldn't mind having proper deep dish pizza make it's way north though...

Maybe some hot san diego ladies too ... :-)

Tom

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755344)

Yeah, cuz after all corruption didn't exist until America invented it..

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17756586)

On behalf of Quebec (inculding the english population)

FUCK YOU!

Re:Sometimes I hate living in America Jr. (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756766)

On Behalf Of Canada ... Get Stuff. And fix yer goddamn roads already. This is 2007 not 1932.

You want to earn some extra credit? Abolish the language laws and stop voting for the Bloc. Until then I'll view all Quebecois as two-faced liars worthy of the highest contempt.

Isn't to say I hate french culture or whatever. Just pissed off that Quebec feels so entitled to special status.

Tom

eh. (0)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#17753884)

Don'tchaknow.

Re:eh. (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754054)

you betcha ...

oh wait, that's fargo, that's an AMERICAN film ya hoser.

Tom

What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17753898)

So, the America isn't the only fucked up country? I don't beleive it.

Re:What? (0, Flamebait)

somersault (912633) | more than 7 years ago | (#17753990)

Are you from America by any chance? Or are you possibly a terrorist? 'The america', 'beleive'? *puts on troll hat*

Well....... (1)

UPZ (947916) | more than 7 years ago | (#17753948)

Welcome to the party, Canada. Once upon a time we Americans looked at you as a beacon of hope!

Re:Well....... (1)

udowish (804631) | more than 7 years ago | (#17753980)

Nothing is written in stone yet... Since our last government (liberals) had such a HUGE public scandal something like this coming out with our new gov may well put the brakes on it totally!

Re:Well....... (4, Funny)

AutopsyReport (856852) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754034)

Our bacon is the way, the truth, and the life.

Re:Well....... (3, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754302)

Oy vey! What a ham!

Re:Well....... (1)

Darth Pondo (609687) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754178)

No we didn't.

Re:Well....... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755638)

Actually this isn't really new. For those that don't follow Canadian politics, the record industry has bought out the last 4 heritage ministers (the last three were Liberals). Nice to see they have reconciled with Bev Oda, because the they we financing her Liberal rival during the election ... when the Conservatives won, they dropped the Liberal like a stone and started bribing Oda instead. The Liberal Heritage ministers were even approaching the record industry looking for the bucks, rather than waiting for the industry officials to approach them with offers. What chance do Canadians have under such circumstances? None. We'll just have to ignore the resulting laws like everyone else.

Re:Well....... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755910)

The only people who look up to Canada are stupid, self-hating Americans. Learn a few things about Canada and you'll understand why so many hippies threaten to move there ... but never do.

duh (5, Funny)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17753952)

Canada's Music Lobby Buys Government Access
 
Thats what lobbys do. I say we ban lobbying all together. Who wants to help me lobby for that? Bring money.

Re:duh (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754182)

I know you're joking, but seriously, the only way to defeat the well-financed lobby groups is to bring votes. Governments can only be bought as long as that money translates into votes at election time. Shift your culture so people vote for what they believe in and not what they saw on TV and you've won. Change the rules so political parties can only accept donations from businesses that are on the same scale as what private citizens could realistically offer and you've won. But achieving either of these changes is going to take a long time and a lot of campaigning. (Odd, really, since the politicians have nothing to lose from the second, but there you go.)

Re:duh (3, Informative)

dryeo (100693) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754368)

Actually in Canada it is illegal for businesses,trade unions etc to donate any money to political campaigns. Also individuals are limited to donating $1100. Unluckily this only came into effect on Jan 1,2007. See http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=gen&do cument=ec90557&dir=bkg&lang=e&textonly=false [elections.ca]

Re:duh (2, Insightful)

IAmTheDave (746256) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756440)

Man, you guys are idiots. Straight idiots. You know how much the presidential race is gonna cost this year? So I toss a couple of favors to Big Business... they've been like family these past few years. They rub my back, I rub theirs.

I mean, come on. You know how many canucks are gonna have to pony up $1100 to raise what one donation from Exxon nets? Thousands and thousands. And then you've gotta answer to like thousands of people! One donation from Exxon, and I just answer to Exxon. It's good common sense!

You guys are like straight idiots. You'll never catch us enacting such ridiculous laws.

Sincerely,

The US Government

Re:duh (3, Insightful)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754412)

Shift your culture so people vote for what they believe in and not what they saw on TV and you've won.

People vote for what they believe in, problem is they believe what they see on TV.

Re:duh (1)

VWJedi (972839) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755172)

Change the rules so political parties can only accept donations from businesses that are on the same scale as what private citizens could realistically offer and you've won.
That's fine in principal, but how can you ensure that lobbying groups don't abuse that?

Say that Lobbyist Group A gave 1,000 people $1,100 each if they would promise that they'd contribute $1,000 of that to Candidate X (and they could keep $100). How could you know which of the thousands of political contributions are from people bought off by the lobbyists? You can't investigate everyone.

Re:duh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755330)

Did you read the artical? It was like being in a mentle hospitle.

Re:duh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17756364)

"Did you read the artical? It was like being in a mentle hospitle."

What's really needed is a grade school spelling class.

Re:duh (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756176)

I believe that the voters are more influenced by campaign financing than the politicians are. If the money does not translate into votes, then the amount donated will be completely irrelevant. There's no need to change or even implement any rules regarding campaign financing or term limits or anything else that removes the voters ability to decide for themselves. These regulations only attack the symptoms, and do nothing to get the voters to decide more carefully. It's another form of off-loading responsibility. And it completely fails to acknowledge the fact that most voters put their own self interests above all else. What we see is the result of that. This is what the politicians reflect, and they act accordingly.

We all knew it was coming. (1)

danomac (1032160) | more than 7 years ago | (#17753966)

This was inevitable. After all the crap that went on the last couple of years, it was bound to happen.

Just recently I read a newspaper article stating that Canada is now on the watch list for movie piracy (up there with Russia and China.) The article stated approximately 50% of movies are cammed here, and that the movie industry will likely delay the releases of new films here.

I'm not surprised at all.

Re:We all knew it was coming. (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754096)

Delay releases? Of the shitty movies they put out?

I'd rather have more indy films than hollywood crap [which incidentally is filmed more and more in Canada anyways!].

Frankly, if the movie looks half decent I'll spend the $10 to see it in the theater, and THEN make a copy once it's out on DVD. If the movie is just mildly entertaining [re: better than watching my facial hair grow] I'll just copy it from DVD.

Lesson: make less shitty movies.

Tom

Re:We all knew it was coming. (1)

danomac (1032160) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754290)

Tom: Same here.

I don't go to theatres anyway. I don't download movies. I don't rent them. They just don't interest me to begin with.

I can only think of one movie that's coming up this year that has my interest: Die Hard 4 (or whatever they call it.) That'll probably be the only movie I'll see this year.

I hope that one isn't a waste of time.

Still, I'm not surprised that this has happened. Canada is pretty lax on this topic. I'd like it to stay that way, but they'll be pressured into copyright "reform" (or "degradation"?) anyway.

You pegged the REAL issue here (1)

WebCowboy (196209) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754512)

The article stated approximately 50% of movies are cammed here, and that the movie industry will likely delay the releases of new films here.

Sounds like you get it more than the article poster. "Whining" and dining the heritage minister every month has been happening since Copps was the minister in the Liberal government, and we managed to avoid our own DMCA to this point. The current political environment has provided the opportunity for much more public input and consideration that the previous government:

* The current Canadian parliament is a minority government and since copyright law reform is a low priority it is probably further back on the order paper than, say, environment or "fiscal re-balancing". If the government falls in a confidence motion on such higher-priority issues then the copyright bill will once again die on the order paper and it's back to square one. Unfortunately, the Liberals (official opposition) are the most "pro-DMCA" party in parliament so if the governing Conservatives can be convinced to support it such a motion might pass easily if it does come before a vote.

* The heritage ministry is not solely responsible for copyright law--it must seek agreement with the industry ministry which is the final authority on copyright. The industry minister, Maxime Bernier, has been pretty critical about measures that would restrict fair use or compromise privacy. If a new copyright bill IS passed it would be significantly less restrictive than that which died on the order paper of the previous Liberal government (still bad, but less of a bad thing).

I believe that in the US you can be punished legally for bringing photographic devices into theatres or other performance venues against the proprietor's wishes, but that there is no such law in Canada. In any case such law doesn't fall directly in with copyright--It is still illegal in Canada, under current copyright law, to duplicate/distribute/broadcast the cammed movies. It is only legal to cam them and view them privately (it is equivalent to using your VCR to record a TV programme for private viewing in terms of Canadian copyright law).

Obviously, the pressure of potential economic loss be the delay of movie releases in Canada may force the government's hand. Restricting or removing the fair dealing provisions of copyright is one way to solve the camming problem, and I'm sure the industry will fight to have the most broadest brush possible used to paint over this issue...however a law much narrower in scope could (and should) be applied. There is some hope that Bernier will be the moderating force here since Oda is a bit of a pushover.

Re:You pegged the REAL issue here (1)

danomac (1032160) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756252)

I believe that in the US you can be punished legally for bringing photographic devices into theatres or other performance venues against the proprietor's wishes, but that there is no such law in Canada.

In the article I read, there was no hint of it being illegal to bring in a camcorder into a theatre. The article did state that the venue reserved the right to eject you if you are caught with one.

The article went on to state that the films are watermarked so that they can identify the theatre in which the movie was cammed. This is not visible to the naked eye. What surprised me more is that in the troublesome theatre there are ushers with night vision cameras that will continually monitor people for cameras.

I, for one, would not go to a theatre to be stared down by some guy while watching a movie. No thanks.

Damn, I found the article [canada.com] online. This isn't the exact article I read in our provincial newspaper, but it covers the gist of it.

Quoted from the article:
Cineplex's Jacob said theatre chains all across Canada already employ security guards who are equipped with night vision goggles and other surveillance equipment to try to catch pirates.

How scary.

Re:We all knew it was coming. (1)

Jabrwock (985861) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754516)

the movie industry will likely delay the releases of new films here

Fine with me. I'm sure the movie industry counts me as a "lost sale", and blames it on piracy, or home theatres. Instead, I should be under the "only goes to see 1-2 movies per year because the rest are either not interesting to me, or outright suck"

"You want me to fork out HOW much? This better be f*ing Oscar material, for that price..." (this applies to both theatre prices, and DVD prices)

but... but Chretien! (3, Funny)

Pxtl (151020) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754056)

I thought the Conservative party was supposed to bring an end to corruption and a new environment of accountability.

OW! My political beliefs!

Re:but... but Chretien! (2, Interesting)

Jabrwock (985861) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754136)

I thought the Conservative party was supposed to bring an end to corruption and a new environment of accountability.

But, but, they introduce an Accoutability Act and everything! It even has fancy paper! ;)

I find it disenheartening that her response was "it was legal at the time". Shouldn't she be respecting the act NOW, since her government pushed it through? Respect the spririt of the law and all that? It reminded me of contractors who say "what? I did it to code" which basically means "I did the bare minimum to avoid losing my license."

Re:but... but Chretien! (1)

slashbob22 (918040) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754796)

It even has fancy paper! ;)
That's from the fancy paper lobby group. Apparently they would like more acts to be written.

Don't worry (3, Interesting)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754064)

The lobby is pissing money down a rat hole. The government is in a minority position and will likely fall in the next few months. Considering that the conservatives have steadily dropped in the polls, they are not likely to be around to put such legislation into effect.

I imagine in the meantime, they have bigger fish to fry (like trying to survive), than to worry about a politically unpopular move to satisfy record company executives.

Re:Don't worry (1)

flight_master (867426) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754732)

Exactly. I was modded -1 flamebait for saying that the Conservatives under Mr. Harper are corrupt, useless, and in this case, going against the general public.
If this were to get into the general media, it would create I firestorm, I believe... As Canadians, we are all about our personal rights and freedoms, and if someone is shown to try and cut into those freedoms, he's in big trouble.
All I hope for, is that it happens sooner than later, I can't take much more of Harper, Ambrose, Strahl, and the rest of them...

Not a Partisan Issue (3, Informative)

Comboman (895500) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755572)

I was modded -1 flamebait for saying that the Conservatives under Mr. Harper are corrupt, useless, and in this case, going against the general public.

They were correct for modding you flamebait for an anti-Conservative tirade. This is not a partisan issue. Bev Oda's predecessor in Paul Martin's Liberal government Sam Bulte [wikipedia.org] was just as guilty of accepting money from the music lobby. [michaelgeist.ca] The content industry will throw money at whoever they think can deliver copyright "reform", regardless of what party represent.

Re:Not a Partisan Issue (2, Insightful)

flight_master (867426) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755670)

Indeed, the Liberals were also given money, and if the NDP were in power, the industry would try to give them money too. However, both the NDP and the Liberals listen to the public, to some extent. In case you didn't notice it, Harper does what he wants, when he wants, and how he wants.

Re:Don't worry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755140)

"the conservatives have steadily dropped in the polls"

the conservatives have steadily dropped in the liberal polls...

Re:Don't worry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755366)

Don't fool yourself. Mind you, that must be pretty easy, so carry on...

Re:Don't worry (1)

Jabrwock (985861) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755728)

the conservatives have steadily dropped in the liberal polls...
It's possible to drop further than rock bottom? ;)

Please find me a Conservative poll then that shows they've stayed the same, or have increased in popularity over the past year.

Re:Don't worry (1)

gwait (179005) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755362)

Unfortunately this seems to be a non partisan mental gap in our politicians - the Liberals were just as off key when implementing new laws protecting the music companies - they gave us the blank disc fine (uh tax?) since we're all guilty of pirating music we should all pay up front. Ironically, they messed up by giving us the (debated) right to copy whatever we want in the meantime. My guess is that loophole was just sheer incompetence.. (Sheila "I'll quit if we don't repeal the GST" Copps gave us that loophole - need I say more?)

Maybe we should set up a local branch of the PirateBay Party for our next election - sure would be more fun than the boring Marijuana Party!

Ummm.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754066)

A senior government figure met with the head of the industry she regulates? The horror! If getting our information from blogs is good enough for idiots like us, it should be good enough for our lawmakers.

Re:Ummm.... (4, Interesting)

Pxtl (151020) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754242)

RTFAs - she meets with the CRIA but won't meet with any other relevant organizations (such as consumer rights groups or Canadian artists groups).

Re:Ummm.... (1)

KKlaus (1012919) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755106)

That is a very clever sig you have. Tip o' the hat [/*:-).

Canadian Supreme Court (4, Interesting)

Imexius (967514) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754104)

If I remember correctly hadn't the Canadian Supreme court already decided that downloading music for personal use was within our rights? If that's the case then can't we rely on that case as a precedent to help render this presumed upcoming law void? http://www.cirpa.ca/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID= 824&SiteNodeID=66 [cirpa.ca]

Re:Canadian Supreme Court (4, Insightful)

Jabrwock (985861) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754384)

The SCC ruled that, but they were basing their decision on the laws of the time (ie fair use and other relevant sections of the Copyright Act). If the government ammends the Copyright Act to remove or restrict fair use, there's not much the SC can do, since media consumption isn't a right mentioned in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...

If they neglect to remove fair use though, it would be a valid argument against such a law. I'm assuming a DMCA challenge would be easier in Canada, because of that. They can't deny you the tools to be able to exercise your right to fair use, afterall...

Dam, I voted for her too... (5, Informative)

shlinton (930512) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754118)

http://www.bevoda.ca/contact.htm [bevoda.ca] Contact Bev: Bowmanville Office: 68 King Street East Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3X2 Phone: (905) 697-1699 Fax: (905) 697-1678 Ottawa Office: House of Commons Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6 Phone: (613) 992-2792 Fax: (613) 992-2794 Email: Oda.B@parl.gc.ca From her own website....

Re:Dam, I voted for her too... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754382)

You might as well cc her boss, Steven Harper Prime Minister.
Just tell them... watch out... don't be a cre... tien.

Re:Dam, I voted for her too... (2, Informative)

Jabrwock (985861) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754430)

Yeah, writing to Bev won't get you squat, you might not even get a response. Until Lord Harper lets her, she is supposed to keep her mouth shut on any policy that Harper hasn't already vetted...

Re:Dam, I voted for her too... (1)

UWSofty (542171) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756312)

I emailed her weeks ago. I finally got a response yesterday (if you can call it that). It was just a confirmation that she received my email sent by one of her secretarial lackeys. I have no illusions that she will actually listen to me or any of the Canadian artists who have been vocal on this issue (see Barenaked Ladies or Broken Social Scene). But I thought I'd send the email anyway.

The CRIA is not a Canadian organization (5, Informative)

Rix (54095) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754120)

It's just a branch office of the American RIAA. The group that represents Canadian artists is the Canadian Music Creators Coalition [musiccreators.ca] .

Re:The CRIA is not a Canadian organization (1)

BForrester (946915) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755812)

I see what you're saying, but your statements aren't entirely correct. The CRIA and RIAA are not affiliated. However, many of the member corporations in the CRIA are the same big American music labels (or their Canadian branches) that compose the RIAA. They're equivalent agencies, but not the same. The CMCC certainly represents quite a few artists (not to mention the interests of the Canadian public), but as the group that represents the production companies (read "entities that have more lobbying/bribery assets"), the CRIA still has the bigger political sway.

Oh please (1)

Rix (54095) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756108)

I stand by my statement. The CRIA is most certainly not only affiliated with the RIAA, it is not in any sense a distinct organization. It represents American commercial interests, not Canadian companies, artists, or citizens.

The CMCC has the backing of all major Canadian labels, not just artists. Anything the CRIA has to say should be relayed through David Wilkins.

Canadian Politics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754228)

It's good to know that our politicians are just as corrupt as the ones in the rest of the world. It is that warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there is some consistancy in the world. Excuse me while I write a letter to my MP.

Goddam limey's (1)

Kerstyun (832278) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754260)

Mebbe if theyd foght against king george and his limey's like we did, then they'd be free like us.

My letter to my MP (5, Insightful)

saskboy (600063) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754318)

http://www.abandonedstuff.com/2007/01/15/fairusefi re/ [abandonedstuff.com]

It's important all Canadians write their MP and educate them about the CRIA shenanigans.

Re:My letter to my MP (1)

CokeBear (16811) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756294)

Especially this guy [garth.ca] . Gotta love a Member of Parliament with a blog, eh?

Canadians: What to do about it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754356)

First, log in to OnLineRights.ca and use their helpful form [onlinerights.ca] (be sure to read it so that you agree with it 100%) to mail your MP. I emailed my MP [stephenowen.ca] , and I *was* going to follow it up with a snail mail to make sure he got it, but lo and behold I got actually got a reply...
I will work hard to ensure that any future amendments to our copyright laws are not a regression from that which was proposed in Bill C-60.
Not great (bill C-60 sucked too), but it's a start.

Re:Canadians: What to do about it. (2, Informative)

yukk (638002) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754536)

Don't forget to email her too: Oda.B@parl.gc.ca Maybe add a little note in your email pointing her to the article and ask her how much you have to "donate" to get fair treatment.

Vive le Québec libre! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754394)

Yet another reason for separation of Quebec.

Re:Vive le Québec libre! (0, Troll)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755534)

FYI: If Quebec ever does separate, only the rich and well-connected will be free. Everybody else will be imprisoned by their language. By forcing all Quebeckers to only use French, they are keeping them ignorant of the world. Many Quebeckers are already stuck in Quebec because their English language skills are non-existent. Imagine how much non-French language skills would be allowed once Quebec is ..er.. free. When Quebec was founded, French was the language of business. Today it is English and tomorrow it will be Chinese. Adapt or die.

FYI for the rest of /.: If the web server is located in Quebec or your business is located in Quebec, it's not good enough for the web site to be English and French. It must be French-only! Any exceptions you see are because the owners are rich and well-connected.

Re:Vive le Québec libre! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17756100)

what the hell are you talking about? it's true that it has to be in french, but they can't force you to make it in french only.

there has been abuse from the language police but you are just talking out of your ass

Re:Vive le Québec libre! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17756332)

http://gouv.qc.ca/portail/quebec/pgs/commun [gouv.qc.ca] top right english and español.. WOW THEY'RE BREAKING THEIR OWN LAW?!!?!

Re:Vive le Québec libre! (1)

Dark_MadMax666 (907288) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756698)

Are you fucking trolling? the main page is french...

Re:Vive le Québec libre! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17756368)

They are only imprisoned of their own choosing. I am neither rich nor well connected and I was born in Quebec, Yet I speak English, even though I was educated in French. I learnt English by speaking it with friends and family. All of my family and relatives are French Quebecois and yet my brothers, sister and parents also speak English. They too were educated in French.

We learnt to speak English because we chose not to exclude people based on language. Many, not all, Quebecois are xenophobic, especially my generation and my parent's generation. I've experienced it first hand when I lived in the Saguenay Region, the hot bed of French Nationalism. If you spoke English, you were shunned. If you where French and spoke English, you were considered a Traitor. You were not 'Dyed in the Wool Quebecois'.

I now live in the States and I miss my homeland. But when the whole topic of French Nationalism rears it head, I'm glad I'm not there to experience it. Yet again.

Re:Vive le Québec libre! (2, Insightful)

hublan (197388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755878)

Yet another reason for separation of Quebec.


Oh, come now. Québecois politicians have corruption nailed down just as well as, if not better than, their Ottawa counterparts. Indeed the duplication of all levels of the Federal government in Québec simply encourages this. Ever wondered why the income tax is so high here?

Bribery (2, Interesting)

gsn (989808) | more than 7 years ago | (#17754440)

Theres a pretty big difference between lobbying and bribery. Lobbying isn't intrinsically bad - heck the ACLU does it as does the EFF among /. favourites. The trouble is lobbying is not very far removed from campaign donations. Industry gives politician money and then politician is very receptive to industry umbrella organization lobbying. The latter is for all intents and purposes bribery, especially given the copyright reform legislation. She has apparently been a broadcaster for the better part of her life. Can we say conflict of interest. Somebody should call them on it and accuse her of bribery - there are presumably laws against that sort of thing in Canada. The British probably left something like a public interest litigation around. And if Oda is a minister then accuse Harper of running a corrupt government. Even if it isn't successful the press is bad, and the embarrassment will force them to do something.

Longer term I think there should be a declaration on who writes an actual bill not just who sponsors it, and politicians be forced to declare conflict of interest and remove themselves from any proceedings regarding such legislation or face censure - something I'm sure their opponents will enjoy using the next election.

Of course the trouble with all this is that even if media industry looses this round, they'll just try again in a few years. So I still smile when I hear that the music industries sales are still falling despite the growth of online sales.

Same Minister responsible for Net Neutrality (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754496)

For your information -- this same minister is in bed with CanWest Global (our largest news service) and even had one of their employees planning fundraisers for her. She is also the same minister along with Maxime Bernier that is responsible for Net Neutrality in Canada. If you're Canadian and want to help -- check out Charlie Angus's three-point-plan to ensure the ethical sobriety of the heritage minister. Mp3 here [charlieangus.net] If you want to help the Net Neutrality movement and are a Canadian you can sign the petition at neutrality.ca [neutrality.ca] These cabmins that take money from industries they oversee need to be held accountable for their actions.

Money for influence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17754546)

What makes this all-the-more interesting is the fact this Conservative government was voted in on a platform of cleaning up corruption and scandal in the federal government.

Guess it's a case of "do as I say, not as I do."

di3k (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755164)

vary for diiferent clearly. There

Canada's Liberal Propagandists (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17755726)

are busy working slashdot again!

My letter to my MP (3, Insightful)

Ripley29 (644468) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755788)

Dear Mr. Shipley,

I am a constituent in your riding, and I am writing concerning an article from CBC.ca concerning fair-use rights in Canada (http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/01/11/cop yright-canada.html).

Like many Canadians, I am a lawful citizen who loves both music and technology. I am a Computer Programmer by trade, and am also a musician; needless to say, I take both of these subjects quite seriously, and I am concerned when my enjoyment of either of these become threatened by law. You see, I listen to all of my purchased CDs on my home computer and my portable music player. The first thing I do when I buy a Compact Disc is to 'rip' it to my home computer, so I can catalog and listen to all of my music as digital music files, or MP3s. Under current Canadian law, 'fair-use rights' allow me to do this.

If new legislation proposed by the Hon. Maxime Bernier and Heritage Minister Hon. Bev Oda is passed, my 'fair-use rights' will be taken away. I will considered a criminal in the eyes of the law if I choose to copy music in any way which I have purchased.

The simple fact is that we, as Canadians, already pay a 'private copying levy' on all blank media to supplement lost revenues due to piracy; those of us who buy blank CD-ROM media, even if used to backup personal data, are already giving the Canadian Recording Industry money. The continued stong revenues from music Compact Discs, added to the success of Digital Download services such as iTunes prove that piracy is not hurting the Recording Industry as much as they would like us to believe.

The problem is that taking away our fair-use rights, and enacting Digital Rights Management on musical Compact Discs would prevent copying of music for any purpose. The Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) would be given the ability to charge multiple times for the same music (Once for a Compact Disc, once for a PC and once for each Portable music player). This unfortunately appears to be the ultimate goal of Digital Rights Management; it has little to do with actually combating piracy. This is greed, plain and simple, yet disguised as anti-piracy measures. Canadian legislation should not be enacted merely to provide large industries additional revenue streams; the law abiding consumer loses in such a scenario.

I am not the only voter who would be affected by such legislation; this would affect every citizen that owns an iPod or other portable music player, or has ever listened to music on a PC. If this legislation is enacted, the outrage will be felt by many average citizens.

The Canadian people do not want this. The recording artists themselves do not want this. This legislation only serves the interests of the CRIA and major music distributors. It is also distressing to learn what close ties Hon. Bev Oda and the CRIA have, even though the voices of average citizens and Canadian recording artists are not being heard (http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1631/125/ ).

I truly hope that you take this issue seriously, as I do sincerely believe that if this legislation is enacted and Canadian fair-use is taken away, Canadian citizens including those in your constituency will act swifty and harshly.

Thank-you for taking the time to read this. It is appreciated.

[Name]
[City and Province]
Lambton--Kent--Middlesex

CC: Maxime Bernier, Bev Oda

Re:My letter to my MP (1)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 7 years ago | (#17756000)

Nicely worded.

I'm going to send a similar letter to my MP as well.

Note that we shouldn't copy the letter, fellow Canucks - they'll think it's a form letter and ignore it.

Heres MY letter to my MP.... (1)

El Gruga (1029472) | more than 7 years ago | (#17755966)

Dear MP, Please take your fat snout OUT of the RIAA/CRIA trough. Realise this: I couldnt give a flying fu*k what you criminals in Ottawa do or say - I will use MY music any way I damn want, come good laws or bad ones. Good luck in the next election - you'll need it.

Heh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17756864)

What? You thought only the US government was for sale?

Surprise!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>