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 DMCA Won't Include Consumer Rights

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the hard-not-to-respect-a-strong-lobby dept.

The Internet 192

An anonymous reader writes "As protests mount over the Canadian DMCA, law professor Michael Geist is now reporting that the government plans to delay addressing fair use and consumer copyright concerns such as the blank media tax for years. While the U.S. copyright lobby gets their DMCA, consumers will get a panel to eventually consider possible changes to the law. Many Canadians are responding today with a mass phone-in to Industry Minister Jim Prentice to protest the policy plans."

cancel ×

192 comments

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

FIRST TROUT! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619387)

I am a copyrighted fish!

Re:FIRST TROUT! (5, Informative)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619757)

I'm going to shamelessly post after the first comment in order to get this to the top of the pile. In addition to writing letters to MPs (or emailing, which is a waste of time IMHO) this weekend there happens to be an open house at Mr Prentice's office (in Calgary) tomorrow, Saturday, December 7th from 1:00 - 3:00.

I plan on attending and srongly urge any fellow Calgarians to come to the open house.

Re:FIRST TROUT! (1)

MicktheMech (697533) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619849)

This is a very, very good idea. If I were in the west I'd be there in a second.

Please Mod Parent Up

Re:FIRST TROUT! (5, Informative)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619871)

Sorry forgot the address. Also remember to bring your donation to the food bank! You don't want to look like a bastard =)

1318 Centre Street NE, Suite 105, Calgary, AB

Website here: http://jimprentice.ca/ [jimprentice.ca]

Re:FIRST TROUT! (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619939)

Sorry forgot the address. Also remember to bring your donation to the food bank! You don't want to look like a bastard =)

1318 Centre Street NE, Suite 105, Calgary, AB

Website here: http://jimprentice.ca/ [jimprentice.ca]

I'll be there in spirit. The roads are way too slick for me to come down from Edmonton. But I made a call, sent a letter, and whispered stuff into the ears of the wife of a liberal senator....

Re:FIRST TROUT! (1)

excelblue (739986) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620979)

Isn't Saturday December 8th?

Might want to check your calendars - it's Friday, December 7th.

SLASHDOT SUX0RZ (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619405)

_0_
\''\
'=o='
.|!|
.| |
Canadian DMCA won't include goatse [goatse.ch]

Canadian DMCA? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619407)

that's what, about 85% of the US DMCA?

haha, canucks, we love you!! don't take off, eh?

Re:Canadian DMCA? (1)

Tobenisstinky (853306) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619473)

Hoser!

Re:Canadian DMCA? (5, Funny)

OECD (639690) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619661)

that's what, about 85% of the US DMCA?

You haven't seen the latest exchange rate. It's actually a bit more than 100% of a US DMCA.

Re:Canadian DMCA? (3, Funny)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619687)

that's what, about 85% of the US DMCA?

My consortium would like to buy 100,000 Canadian dollars from you. We are willing to pay up to $90,000 US-- $5000 over and above your quoted price. Please contact me at your earliest convenience.

When will consumers realize... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619417)

When will consumers realize that the only rights you have left are those that the MAFIAA hasn't taken away yet?

The tighter you clench your fist... (3, Insightful)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619421)

...the more content that slips through your fingers.

(apologies to Lucas, et. al.)

Re:The tighter you clench your fist... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619483)

The tighter you clench your cheeks.. the more you begin to look like the Zune Tattoo Guy!

Sincerely,

Mafiaa

PS

I for one welcome our new geek shit eating gaylord

Re:The tighter you clench your fist... (4, Funny)

Spokehedz (599285) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620583)

No need to apologize. He went and turned into a money-grubbing asshat too.

Those pesky rights of citizens (2, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619465)

Thats the way to deal with it: 'you don't get any rights, and if you don't like it, you can appeal, if we feel like listening to you'

Re:Those pesky rights of citizens (2, Interesting)

ToriaUru (750485) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620023)

those pesky rights of citizens are what got the bloody government elected in the first place. So they damn well better listen to us. Get this: The Minister, Jim Prentice refuses to answer over 250 questions posed by Canadians. How's that for pissing off your people? Not a good way to treat your future voters methinks. Esp. if you're a minority government. Hell, no I don't want some stupid American-style DMCA law in my country of Canada. We are the true north, strong and free, and we are going to get a FAIR copyright law. By hook or by crook.

Re:Those pesky rights of citizens (2, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620271)

Good luck with that, you see where complaining and trying to 'vote different' got us down here south of your borders.. just more of the same.

Government is an institution larger then any one person, powered by the wealthy. It's really hard for the common man to make a difference.

But, you can still try.

Vote with your wallet. (5, Insightful)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619469)

Use all means necessary to prevent this sort of behavior from becoming acceptable (i.e. "just the way things are") in Canada. Support independent recording artists and smaller labels who don't engage in draconian contract measures. Don't buy the mass-produced, pop culture oriented crap that's on sale at your local Huge Media Outlet. All you're doing is feeding the legal budget of the lobbying arms of major recording labels.

Support other creative artists who choose to license their work under Creative Commons [creativecommons.org] style licenses. My personal policy for one site I manage is that all article content must be CC licensed.

Most importantly, tell people about your views. Ordinary people on the street. People you work with. Anybody, everybody. You enjoy a system of government where you're allowed to speak your mind... that's sort of a "use it or lose it" proposition in my opinion.

Does this mean you should stop contacting your elected officials. Hell, no. But take your personal, proactive action of your own instead of just waiting around for your elected leadership to make good decisions for you.

Re:Vote with your wallet. (4, Interesting)

MicktheMech (697533) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619787)

It's supposed to work that way, but it doesn't. If we want to reverse the course on something as far along as this is we need to
  1. Engage the media - get this to be a big topic in editorials, etc... get it in front of the general public's eyes
  2. Get access to the analysts that are proposing this type of policy in the first place. This is hard and requires people with access to the bureaucracy. People like the ones that the **AA have bought.

I know that the EFF has some kind of presence up here, but we really need a Canadian group that can do the leg work in Ottawa. (As great as the EFF is, anything American based will be ignored.)

Re:Vote with your wallet. (2, Insightful)

Scruffy Dan (1122291) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620663)

"anything American based will be ignored."

Surely you jest. The RIAA and MPAA have no problems getting our politicians to listen to them.

The MPAA lobbied to get the anti-camcording bill pasted in record time, and the government seems to completely ignore [musiccreators.ca] Canadian musicians while listening to CRIA (which represents no Canadian labels).

Like most politicians, ours listen to money, regardless of where it comes from.

Contact info for MPs and news media (1)

Geof (153857) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620899)

You can find a list of the main actors, plus contact information for members of Parliament and news organizations here [blogspot.com] (scroll down).

The most important person to contact is your MP. I've heard it's better to get him or her to forward your letter to the minister responsible (Jim Prentice) than it is to send it to Prentice directly. Doing both can't hurt. Paper mail and faxes are the best, though phone calls are good too. Don't forget to contact newspapers big and small. In all cases, be polite and to the point.

You can find your MP's contact information by typing in your postal code here [parl.gc.ca] .

If you need sample letters, check out the Facebook group's list [facebook.com] . My non-technical explanation of why this is a terrible law is here [geof.net] . I'll quote it in a reply to this post.

Re:Vote with your wallet. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619969)

Support independent recording artists and smaller labels who don't engage in draconian contract measures.

uuuhhh... that's so fucking easy to say, but what if you think their music sucks ass? your argument is amazingly flawed, the majority of artists in the world belong to labels that have bad business practices, so what you're saying is you should stop listening to your favorite bands because corporations aren't nice? idealistic bullshit that doesn't have anything to do with reality.

Re:Vote with your wallet. (1)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620919)

It has everything to do with reality. I'm putting my money where my mouth is: I can't remember the last time I bought *anything* from a major label. I don't buy DVDs, either. For that matter, I don't even really listen to pop radio anymore... college radio is fine by me. Are you saying that you'll die without buying CDs produced by major labels? Damn dude, go read a book or something.

Do you have any idea how much independently produced music is available online? It's pretty mind-blowing. Sure, for the most part I'm not getting that ultra-studio-edited sound, but I don't really want that anyhow. Variety and lyrical talent count for more in my book.

As for corporations and their bad business practices, I really couldn't care less about corporate activities from a moral standpoint, until those activities start to have a significant negative effect on my civil liberties. Up to that point, they can do whatever the hell they want, screw artists all day long, whatever... because the artist signed the deal in the first place. And before you try to say the poor artist had no choice (they would starve without the labels), I preemptively call "bullshit" on grounds that for many artists, music is about the message as opposed the megabucks. Nobody forces anybody to earn a living producing tunes; people make their own career choices in a free society.

Let's keep the society free enough that people still have that option in the future.

Re:Vote with your wallet. (1)

necro2607 (771790) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620019)

Yup, I buy CDs at bands' shows, and hand cash to them (or their merch person) personally. I'm not cool with supporting exploitation of artists especially being one myself. Frankly big record companies can go fuck themselves (which is about all they'll have left to do, as, increasingly, bands have less and less need for them).

Re:Vote with your wallet. (1)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620947)

I couldn't agree more. On any given weekend in Atlanta you can see at least four different live shows by popular local bands. These guys usually have "day jobs" and perform because they have a genuine love for music, not because they're just dying to make it big on the scene. Would they like to be able to support themselves performing full-time? Sure. Are many of these bands starting to explore new ways of promoting themselves online? Yep. Will some of them turn their sound into a real success story. I bet on it.

Until then, I'll be right there with you buying CDs from bands at shows. I'll take a home-burned disc that represents something new to me over a mass-produced coaster any day.

Re:Vote with your wallet. (2, Interesting)

kwandar (733439) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620129)

I told Minister Prentice that as a former Progressive Conservative party worker, and business executive,I for one would vote with my wallet by donating to other political parties who better represent my views on this issue ... and I WILL!!

Lets see how badly they want to lose the next election.

Re:Vote with your wallet. (1)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620973)

That's got to be the most interesting spin on voting with your wallet I've seen in this thread. Leave it to me to miss the obvious: direct gain/loss of political party donations. I have to say, though, it would take a lot of people following your lead to make an impact. Any chance of you getting on the evening news with that message? :)

Re:Vote with your wallet. (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620933)

Problem is that if you don't buy these goods, the government will regard that and all unspent money as taxable income.

Hrm (1)

B3ryllium (571199) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619479)

I already did my part - I didn't vote for the Conservatives. They still won in my riding anyway. From what I can tell, our MP is a party-line-towing-kinda-guy - and he's rather high ranking, so if he went against the party line there might be ramifications to his career.

However, that said, if the Conservatives go ahead and find a way to push this through, there could well be ramifications to their entire party.

Re:Hrm-High Ranking??? (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619519)

and he's rather high ranking

I thought high ranking meant he had power and others should fear him. You make it sound the other way around.

Re:Hrm-High Ranking??? (2, Insightful)

B3ryllium (571199) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619529)

High-ranking means he kissed a lot of ass to get there, so he'll be damned if he steps on any toes.

Re:Hrm-High Ranking??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619557)

Thus he has no voice or power. I.e. useless.

Re:Hrm-High Ranking??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619589)

Some should but there are still those with higher ranking.

Re:Hrm-High Ranking??? (2, Insightful)

MicktheMech (697533) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619721)

In Canada there are only two kinds of elected officials: The Prime Minister and everyone else. Only one of those has any power. It's always been a problem, but it's been ten times worse with this government.

Re:Hrm-High Ranking??? (1)

rikkards (98006) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620771)

Amen. Remember it was the Liberals who originally brought the previous aborted version of this bill up. Both parties are just as guilty.

Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocracy (5, Insightful)

gnuman99 (746007) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619747)

In Canada, we have a semi-hidden theocracy of Steven Harper (the prime minister). Anyone that does not agree with him, is his enemy. Even in his own party.

When some MP from maritime wanted a better deal for his area than was being offered (and the provincial gov't there wanted it as well), Harper threw him out of the party. Then under pressure, did the exact deal that MP wanted. When asked if the MP that was thrown out would be allowed to rejoin the party, Harper essentially said that he will *never* be part of his party ever again.

Or, he was saying that gov't would be accountable to its people and all other stuff, BS as it turns out. The day after he got a *minority*, he *appointed* a *non-elected* person to Senate *AND* into his cabinet!!! No one from the Conservative party disagreed even the former Reformers - quite sad.

Or, he said that global warming is not real. Then when public sentiment changed, so did he and now he proclaims that his party will somehow fit it now and that is a serious problem. Major flip-flopping there too. No one disagreed on that magic 1984-style switch.

Or, let's help the poor by cutting GST but screwing them with income taxes. Poor older people on fixed income are probably hardest hit here. Instead of drastic cuts in GST, he should have cut income taxes, but I guess it looks better if you pay $0.02 less on cup of coffee than $100 on a paycheck. The only people that disagreed were the conservatives - none were MPs.

One can go on and on here. While Liberals where in power, he said that Canada betrayed US by not going with the 2003 invasion (something that US didn't even want anyway). Now he said he never supported that. Essentially, Harper to Canada is like Bush to US. You disagree with him, and you are the enemy. He is always right. The only thing saving his butt right now is the giant surpluses that started when Paul Martin was the finance minister (good finance minister, very bad prime minister :(.

So essentially, high ranking or low ranking in Harper gov't means nothing. You have to follow the Harper dogma or you'll be kicked out. Any criticism is NOT tolerated.

Will this DMCA pass? Depends. Depends if it gets a vote and that depends only if Harper wants it passed. If he does, it will go to a vote no matter what the Justice minister thinks. The only ones that can stop him are the opposition parties (its minority gov't) - fortunately Liberals are aiming for an election soon so it may be more effective trying to prod their Justice critic over this (or maybe even Dion?) than the Conservatives.

I would categorize my self as a definite fiscal conservative, but Harper is definitely NOT a conservative. He's as much of a conservative as Bush is, which is kind of sad. :( Where are you Reform???!

PS. If you are not Canadian, this post probably has some references you do not understand. That is OK :)

Re:Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocr (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619957)

Crazy Zionist byatch like Howard, Merkel, Bush and Sarkozy.

Re:Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocr (0, Troll)

ls -la (937805) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619959)

In Canada, we have a semi-hidden theocracy of Steven Harper (the prime minister). Anyone that does not agree with him, is his enemy. Even in his own party.
In the US, the President doesn't even try to hide it.

Re:Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocr (1, Informative)

TaoTehChing (954321) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620647)

Bah, I don't like Harper, but he is really not that bad. He stays out of my business, I stay out of his. I wish I could say that for the Liberals and the NDP.

For the record the Atlantic provinces wanted more than their share, plain and simple. Why should they get special treatment? Before you respond, I'll let you know I am not from Ontario or Quebec. My province get the shaft as well, but this is not a case thats worth bitching about.

As for cutting taxes, Harper made life a fuck of a lot easier for students. Tax free scholarships have saved the wife and I over 30k. I have heard a lot of moaning about the GST cut, I think it will help the economy and the % will add up at the end of the year for me and you.

Harper said that the Kyoto protocol is a global socialist wealth redistribution scheme, and he is correct. I repeat, I do not like this guy, but he spoke a rare truth on that one.

I am a reformer as well, but I think that we should not be bitching. Comparing Harper to Bush is plain nonsense. Afterall, with the hardcore reformer(even as the lesser evil) comes all the religious BS. Thats when we get into Bush territory.

Re:Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocr (1)

Scruffy Dan (1122291) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620711)

"Kyoto protocol is a global socialist wealth redistribution scheme"

Ever hear of negative externalities? If not you might want to read up on them. This "socialist wealth redistribution scheme" is an attempt to internalize costs that used to be external.

Removing externalities is essential for the free market to function properly.

Re:Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocr (1)

TaoTehChing (954321) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620829)

I have taken econ 1000. If they are trying to deal with externalities, why would they give exemptions to China(are they #1 yet?) and other developing nations. This is politics, not what's good for the environment. REAL concerns such as water pollution here in Canada are going unnoticed because of this nonsense. I am not denying climate change, my wife is studying it's effects on arctic hydrology, but to think Kyoto will have a tangible effect is foolish(yes, I am pretty sure I can prove that statement). It's pure politics. I also need to add that handing off part of our sovereignty to some global organization is a bad thing. If your personal(or even regional) concerns are hardly heard on a local level, imagine a global level.

Re:Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocr (1)

Froster (985053) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620775)

Well said. Harper is not perfect, even to his own constituency, but I think that he has done the best job of moderating Canada's various regional agendas better than any Prime Minister in recent memory. This has led to quite a bit of whining in Liberal areas like cities here in Ontario, but there seems to be much more agreement with him outside of these areas than the Liberals or Mulroney beofre them ever were able to muster. Harper's not perfect, but reflecting the views of more Canadians is a very good thing for our political system IMHO.

Re:Low/High ranking means nothing in Harper theocr (1)

Chemicalscum (525689) | more than 6 years ago | (#21621197)

Serves you right for supporting Reform.. Populist right-wingers always end up being used by neo-cons like Harper who are in the pay of big corporations and a foreign power (you know who).

What did you expect? You guys are as weird and dumb as the US "libertarians" who end up putting the freedom of capital ahead of the freedom of people.

Re:Hrm (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619733)

I didn't vote for the Conservatives. They still won in my riding anyway


That's funny. The majority of people in my riding didn't vote for the Conservatives either, but we got one [flickr.com] anyway.

Not the Conservatives -- It's the Money! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619735)

I already did my part - I didn't vote for the Conservatives.


It's not Conservatives that are the problem; it's the legalized bribery. Campaign contributions, fundraiser dinners, etc. by whatever name you want to call it is: I pay to put you in office, you vote to protect and enhance my business model.

As an example, John Conyers, who I otherwise support is backing this big fat stinking turd: Congress Creates Copyright Cops [slashdot.org] . From TOFA (The Other Funny Article):

The Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property (PRO IP... groan) Act of 2007 has the backing of many of the most powerful politicians on the House Judiciary Committee, including John Conyers (D-MI), Lamar Smith (R-TX), and "Hollywood" Howard Berman (D-CA).


I know I'm mixing the American and Canadian metaphors here, but the underlying point is this: If the law allows our politicans any wiggle room to be corrupt, the businesses with lots of money and a desire to corrupt them will take advantage without hesitation or remorse.

Disclosure: I'm a liberal from the People's Republic of Madison, WI; the "Moscow of the West" ... I'm telling you it isn't the Conservatives, it's the money!

Re:Hrm (1)

SniperClops (776236) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620133)

I voted Liberal and already wrote my MP about this whole thing. But I have a feeling we are gonna have this crammed down our throats because the conservatives do what the Americans want. VOTE LIBERAL!

Re:Hrm (1)

Wolvie MkM (661535) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620191)

As a card carrying member of the LPoC I plan on it in this election. I still do not view Dion as a proper PM but if it will stop the government from removing our rights it's our duty to perform this act.

I would be surprised if this even gets out of parliament, the NDP, Grits, and Bloc don't exactly tend to fawn over Conservative bills.

In the INCREDIBLY unlikely event that this actually is passed I would be again rather surprised if the senate allows this to become law with the Liberal heavy content.

On to the election which is only a few months away I can't see anyone getting a majority. I still have the feeling that the conservatives will win again but I still think this country is smart enough not to give these bastards a Majority rule.

How Wonderful Canada Is (1, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619501)

I keep hearing about how wonderful Canada is, compared to their neighbor to the south, and then stuff like this happens which seems to show no regard for the common citizen at all!

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619569)

Your comment would be a lot more insightful if we hadn't shown them how it's done first...

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1)

coppro (1143801) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619743)

This won't get through. If the Conservatives try to actually pass the bill, the other parties will not pass up the opportunity. The Liberals want an election, and what better to do it with than a bill that everyone hates? Neither the NDP nor the Bloc will pass the opportunity either. If the Conservatives actually try to play this bill out, I would definitely not pass this bill. More likely than not, the Conservatives are hoping that this bill will still be on the table when they fall (and I don't doubt that they will at some point in the near future).

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (2, Insightful)

MicktheMech (697533) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619825)

The Liberals don't want an election, they'll get slaughtered. If the conservatives want this bill to pass they can get it through. Copyright reform isn't sexy and nobody wants to fight an election over it.

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1)

coppro (1143801) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620147)

Ignoring the fact that Dion has been giving everything short of a press release regarding a spring election, the copyright bill would be the perfect thing to defeat. It makes them look good. I mean, if there's this nasty nasty bill that no one wants, and it takes the opposition to knock it down, the advantage would be huge. A bill this restrictive is a great thing to defeat if you need a boost going into an election. And that's not saying anything about the fact that the government will get sued over the Charter of Rights and Freedoms if this goes through.

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21620231)

the copyright bill would be the perfect thing to defeat. It makes them look good

If the entire Canadian voting public were on slashdot and reading this thread, I'd agree with you ... but since we know there are at least some Canadians who do not live in their parents' basement, we must assume there is a segment of the population that will have no clue about the ramifications of a DMC-EH bill. So it all comes down to how this issue gets spun by the news media, what kinds of soundbites get repeated from the House of Commons, etc. In other words, there is a big segment of the voting public that can be shamelessly manipulated into voting for something that punishes evil, antisocial hackers who want to steal money from honest hardworking artists and the corporations that help them.

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21620473)

DMC-EH bill


+1 Frickin' hilarious

Good comment as well.

It makes me crazy, the same people I know who will vote Conservative in the next election have no compunction about pirating music, software whatever. And they see it as very black and white. They think they're "doing wrong," but they don't care. This group will be indifferent to this law, because they will assume (correctly, no doubt) that there is very little chance it will directly effect them.

It's frustrating. I'm a copyright holder. I want people to respect copyright, and I think the only way they will is if it actually benefits them to do so. I would like to see an effort made to educate people about what copyright is, why it might be useful and how it can actually benefit them. And that won't happen if legislation designed to please shareholders of big media companies is passed.

Legislation should serve the needs of citizens, not corporations. Copyright laws that give tangible benefits to both copyright holders and the public at large and more likely to be respected, and more likely to contribute to the shared culture of our society.

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1)

SleepyHappyDoc (813919) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620603)

The CBC is giving it pretty massive coverage also, and quite a few Canadians listen to them (probably with very little overlap from the Slashdot audience).

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (2, Insightful)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619917)

I keep hearing about how wonderful Canada is, compared to their neighbor to the south, and then stuff like this happens which seems to show no regard for the common citizen at all!
You'll keep hearing wonderful things because we actually have a fairly highly motivated political class who more or less raises enough outrage to keep laws on the better side of sane. Sometimes it's an uphill battle though. I think this minority government wouldn't risk power over this. Hopefully they'll tone it down so much it won't be a threat or they'll ditch it.

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620053)

"I keep hearing about how wonderful Canada is, compared to their neighbor to the south, and then stuff like this happens which seems to show no regard for the common citizen at all!"

Give 'em a break. They'll never get Statehood if they don't play by the rules!

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620251)

When stuff like this happens, all countries have this in common: it's pretty much solely the government's doing, and the citizens were not considered or consulted while making the decision which affects them so much. Definitely it's not what I want as a Canadian.

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (3, Insightful)

wumingzi (67100) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620339)

I keep hearing about how wonderful Canada is, compared to their neighbor to the south, and then stuff like this happens which seems to show no regard for the common citizen at all!

Canada is a wonderful country which is run by plutocrats rather like its counterpart to the South. The vast majority of the money and power is concentrated into a few hands. The social contract gives ordinary people a slightly better shake than their American counterparts get, but if you think it's a Utopian wonderland, you should really hang out there for a few years.

The wedge is simple. Billions (with a b) of dollars are transferred from the US film and television industries to Canada for making feature films and serials. Don't think for a moment that those who send that money up there haven't had a friendly word with their MP, PM, and Premier about how they feel about Canadian copyright law, and wouldn't it be a shame if all this film work wound up in Austin or Rhode Island?

Re:How Wonderful Canada Is (1)

eclectro (227083) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620359)

I keep hearing about how wonderful Canada is....and then stuff like this happens which seems to show no regard for the common citizen at all!
Look at it this way. After the RIAA cops beat them up at least they will be able to find healthcare. So still better, kinda.

That's "Conservatives" for ya.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619531)

This isn't surprising. This is the sort of tripe that we should come to expect from those who label themselves the "Conservative" Party of Canada. As any political observer can plainly see, the current Canadian government in almost no way upholds true conservative values.

For instance, all real conservatives value the rights of the individual over rights of the corporation. Although certain judicial precedent may suggest that corporations should be afforded the same rights as individuals, that clearly is nothing but a legal perversion of reality. Yet here we have the Conservative Party of Canada taking a stance that is completely contradictory to true conservative beliefs, with them supporting non-Canadian corporate interests rather than the interests of the Canadian citizenry.

Real conservatives also firmly believe in avoiding this sort of regulation. Information is naturally meant to be distributed and communicated. And so those who hold conservative views realize this, and strive to make such communication as effective as possible. That's where true economic benefits lie, in the widespread dispersal of information.

So those Canadians who truly are conservatives, please vote for a party other than the so-called "Conservative" Party of Canada in future elections. They just aren't conservative in any way.

Re:That's "Conservatives" for ya.... (1)

Snocone (158524) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619711)

For instance, all real conservatives value the rights of the individual over rights of the corporation.

D00d ...

A real conservative has no truck with that "corporation" nonsense at all. A man is FULLY responsible for his actions. Creeping corporatism is the slippery slope to fascism!

offtopic (1)

nirvash (1002781) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619549)

why they have to use the term "consumer" instead of citizen? feels like we only have rights if we buy things.

Re:offtopic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619597)

I agree. I never use the word 'consumer' if I can use 'citizen' instead. I think something has been lost in our society when people are almost exclusively referred to as 'consumers' in the media.

Re:offtopic (1)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620843)

feels like we only have rights if we buy things.

Like government officials?

Whiners (1, Troll)

Quantam (870027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619613)

Canadian DMCA Won't Include Consumer Rights

What kind of expectation of special treatment is that? If consumers want rights they can pay for them just like everybody else!

If in Calgary... (0, Offtopic)

jamacdon (445487) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619615)

Prepare to be tased

Re:If in Calgary... (3, Funny)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619835)

I think I'll have to wear my tin foil outfit. It's double thick and has a full hood. Should divert the shock and prevent the MP from penitrating my mind.... all at the same time.

Re:If in Calgary... (0, Offtopic)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619921)

It is "tazed," not "tased."

Re:If in Calgary... (1)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620029)

Oh come on, that's like "recognize" and "recognise", they're the same thing, and equally valid depending on where in the world you are.

Re:If in Calgary... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21621163)

"Tased" and "Tazed" - I guess it really doesn't matter. Unless you are in Vancouver Airport and you are Polish. Then it's a matter of life and death.

Designed to fail? (2, Insightful)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619619)

Maybe I'm wrong here, but isn't it quite common in Canada to deliberately create a law proposal so bad it won't pass as that is some times easier than opposing it? I.e, if politics is such that you can't officially oppose something, then you just create a stooge proposal which is doomed to fail instead. At least that's what a Canadian friend of me claimed, so I figured maybe this is a bit like that? Of course I could be wrong, I don't really know enough about Canada to be sure.

Re:Designed to fail? (1)

mgiuca (1040724) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620619)

If you were really using that tactic, you'd want to make very sure it failed ...

Re:Designed to fail? (1)

Scruffy Dan (1122291) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620727)

The problem is that copyright reform was mentioned in the throne speech. This means that it will likely be a confidence motion, and since the Liberals (the opposition) are in such rough shape they will probably want to ensure the bill passes so they don't have to fight an election in their weakened state.

That being said I hope you are right. This bill deserves to die.

Bah! (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619691)

My life is a crotch!

All joking aside, this is absolute garbage. Trying to stop people from making money through copyright infringement, I.E. attacking actual criminals, including the organized kind is fine. Trying to make a criminal out of me and my friends because we pirate music and movies? No way. If they get this thing through, I'll vote just about anyone in who'll actually get rid of it. Even if that means putting up with the liberals for 11 years.

Re:Bah! (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620145)

Well, if they do push it through, I suspect the net effect will be much the same as it was here in the U.S. when the DMCA was signed into law: copyright infringement will continue as before on the same massive scale, only now they'll have pissed off all the people that understand the issues and have the knowledge and power to commit infringement on an even greater scale. Watch the networks begin to swell with music and movies upon news that this law has been passed. I swear, every time I hear about something like this I feel like posting a couple of torrents to The Pirate Bay or Mininova ... you know, just to spit in their eye.

Basically, it's just stupid, it won't advance their cause as much as they think it will, and they'll alienate even more people. I just can't believe the degree of assholiness these people exhibit, and I don't care what country they're in. It's really unbelievable.

Sent to my MP, and the two ministers (5, Informative)

SKorvus (685199) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619765)

Honourable Ministers and Member Jim Prentice, Josée Verner, and Hedy Fry:

I am writing as a resident of Vancouver and citizen of Canada.

I would like to express my strong opposition to the changes to Canadian copyright law being proposed.

Canadian laws must work for the benefit of all Canadians. Not for specific industries at the expense of everyday citizens, and especially not foreign-owned corporations.

Artists, musicians, filmmakers and performers have a right to profit from their creations. But digital technology and the Internet have revolutionized the production and distribution of media, rendering obsolete the physical products around which copyrighted works have been based in the past.

The burden is on publishers and creators to innovate and find ways to profit from their works that are acceptable to consumers and consistent with a world in which sharing media is free of cost and effort. It should not be the Government of Canada's role to prop up antiquated business models or forcibly subsidize industries that are unable to adapt to 21st Century realities. Crippling technology and placing onerous and chilling restrictions on the ability of citizens to communicate does not serve the public interest.

I am concerned that this new bill to change copyright law will favour industry and lacks any meaningful input from consumer groups or experts on modern copyright law such as Dr. Michael Geist (U of O). Any bill should consider first the rights and interests of the Canadian public and consumers, before US lobby groups or international bodies.

In the words of Canadian science-fiction author and writer Cory Doctorow, "The US's approach to enforcing copyright in the digital age has resulted in 20,000 lawsuits against music fans, technology companies being sued out of existence for making new multi-purpose tools, and has not put one penny into the pocket of an artist or reduced downloading one bit. The USA stepped into uncharted territory in 1998 with the DMCA and fell off a cliff -- that was reckless, but following them off the cliff is insane."

Thank-you.

Re:Sent to my MP, and the two ministers (4, Interesting)

Mr. Flibble (12943) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619887)

I hope you don't mind if I use the above as a template and send a similar message to my MP's as well.

Snail mail of course.

And all Canucks out there, if you mail a letter to an MP - it does not require postage. Just drop it in the mail, and it gets delivered.

Where possible, choose snail mail over email, snail mail gets more attention.

Re:Sent to my MP, and the two ministers (1)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620123)

You should send it in the biggest box you can find.

Re:Sent to my MP, and the two ministers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619949)

What are you thinking?

Old business = selling access to copyrighted works.

New business = One person buys, shares with the rest of the planet. No revenue, no sales, ever.

Didn't anyone teach you to share when in you were a child? How dare you imply that there is any possibility of "profit" from digital media. We've spent the last 15 years or so proving that once something hits the Internet if it isn't porn there is no profit in it. Except advertising, and still that is a sucker bet because anyone with a hosts file and knows where to put it is blocking ads.

Knowledge is power, ignorance pays the bills.

Re:Sent to my MP, and the two ministers (1)

fizzding (1171839) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620767)

Ahhh.... Hedy Fry. The same one who reported cross-burnings in Prince George? She'll listen.

We need something better than Creative Commons! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21619889)

Creative Commons is okay, but we need one site, with one license, which allows unlimited free usage and sharing.

We geeks need to find a way to make restricted content completely irrelevant.

But that is hard to do if we haven't created the garden, yet, the garden where we know that playing is freely allowed.

I don't want to read a license. I don't want to share, but only under certain circumstances that I need to burrow through. Like all of you, I want complete freedom, combined with complete simplicity.

How can we wall these MAFIAA's off into fenced-in areas of their own making, and exclude them from our sight? That is the real challenge. We need to help the MAFIAA's watermarking along, or some sort of solution which will exclude them from Bit Torrent.

Coders, start coding.

Re:We need something better than Creative Commons! (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620071)

Creative Commons is okay, but we need one site, with one license, which allows unlimited free usage and sharing.
GNU GPL?

Mass Phone in! That was me, (2, Interesting)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619897)

I made a call to Mr. Prentice's Ottawa office this morning. I got a reply instantly and left a polite note stating my extreme dissatisfaction with the direction in which they were going and noting I would drop my Conservative membership if this bill is even read. I've also been mobilizing my friends and my office (one of the ladies is the wife of a senator) to kibosh this bill if it's not kosher.

Re:Mass Phone in! That was me, (1)

necro2607 (771790) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620247)

Conservative membership? What the hell? I was raised to consider that a person's political affiliation was a somewhat personal thing. Seems like most people I've known are like that... but then there are people all over the place "registering" as having a certain political affiliation? That seems pretty messed up to me. Way to make things just that much easier for your private rights as a citizen to be even more quickly eroded.

Re:Mass Phone in! That was me, (2, Insightful)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620321)

Conservative membership? What the hell? I was raised to consider that a person's political affiliation was a somewhat personal thing. Seems like most people I've known are like that... but then there are people all over the place "registering" as having a certain political affiliation? That seems pretty messed up to me. Way to make things just that much easier for your private rights as a citizen to be even more quickly eroded.
Should being active in politics be discouraged? I have a voice with a vote, but I have a louder voice as a party faithful registering dissent. My peer group(perhaps not my generation) is very openly political. I have lively but polite debates with all sorts of people. Speaking to an MP for 10 min likely has as much effect on democracy as 50 years of voting. Like it or not it's a human system. So i vote, I send letters, and i affiliate myself with the parties whose ideas i find most attractive. I affiliated myself with the conservatives because I liked the democratic reforms. I may unaffiliated myself due to the bent towards civil liberties reduction.

Re:Mass Phone in! That was me, (1)

necro2607 (771790) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620445)

Oh I agree, going and calling up and talking to an actual person will have the most effect. But I am not cool with politicians knowing what party I am "officially registered" as having affiliation with. Frankly it is none of their business.

Of course, political involvement is great, I think a lot of people don't think about it, or avoid the topic too much. I understand though that it's just not something a lot of peoeple have interest in worrying about. Of course, then they don't really realize that there are people who will gladly take that position FOR them, and really abuse the position.

Sorry gotta run, can't write more...

Two words: minority government... (5, Insightful)

Hamster Lover (558288) | more than 6 years ago | (#21619941)

I doubt the bill, at least as it currently stands, will ever become law.

First, I would be surprised if the bill even makes it out of committee because the minority Conservatives have to beg, borrow and steal support from any and all parties for any bill to become law; they are effectively politically neutered. This has created some rather unique partnerships over the last year, with the Conservatives finding support for some bills from such ideological enemies as the left wing NDP and the separationist Bloc Quebecois. The current Parliament has been limping along like this for too long and a political showdown is coming in the form of an election. The problem is the only other party that can challenge the Conservatives, the Liberals, are laboring under an ineffective leader, an essentially non-existent platform and a divided and disorganized membership.

Second, even without the dagger of a potential election hanging over it, this legislation will almost certainly be amended, picked apart and thoroughly scrutinized by the opposition and other parties looking to embarrass the Conservatives or score political points. This is where public furor will have the most effect. If the public and affected parties can hammer home the reality of what this bill is proposing, it will leave the committee stage with amendments to the most egregious portions of the bill. Regardless, I can't think of a single piece of legislation the Conservatives have introduced since they took power that has not come back from committee without amendments. They simply do not have the votes to overturn such changes.

I am not trying to be unrealistically optimistic here, but I just don't see a need to panic -- yet. Call, write or email your MP and let them know your opinions.

Re:Two words: minority government... (1)

weinerdog (181465) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620491)

The Liberal Party is in disarray and has an uncharismatic leader with a low profile. The opposition has had ample opportunity to topple the government, but is afraid of fighting an election at this time, especially if they go to the polls with the public perception that they were the ones who made the government fall. It is generally thought that the Conservatives want the government to fall, provided it can be blamed on the uncooperative opposition. If they manage to engineer the fall of their own government and pin the blame on the Liberals, they have a decent shot at a majority.

The Bloc will probably support this legislation; the NDP will oppose it. (If even they support it, we're all screwed.) To defeat the bill, the Liberals must oppose it, but if it becomes a confidence issue--and I don't put it past Harper to abuse the confidence process in this way--the Liberals will have to decide if the bill is unpopular enough to risk being blamed for forcing a new election because of their opposition to it.

Of course, the Liberals introduced a DMCA-Lite bill during their last term in office, so I wouldn't assume they're against it to begin with.

*sigh* I remember a time when Canadians said, "sure our dollar is worthless, but we have halfway-sensible copyright laws, and our police don't go around killing people who pose no danger to anyone." If things continue like this, I'm moving to Greenland.

Re:Two words: minority government... (2, Interesting)

telso (924323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620507)

You think this bill won't pass, but aha, you missed a short line from the Speech from the Throne [sft-ddt.gc.ca] :

Our Government will improve the protection of cultural and intellectual property rights in Canada, including copyright reform.
See, now that Harper put it in the throne speech, he can do whatever he wants, and if the Liberals (and the other parties) oppose it, bang, election time, and the Liberals probably don't want to go to an election over copyright reform. See, the trick about Harper's throne speech gimmick is he can name every policy area in existence, then introduce whatever laws he wants, and say "Ah ah ah, it's in the throne speech; if you agreed with that, you agree with this." No matter that the quote says nothing about what he'd do, or taking consumer rights away, or anything like that. Immediate poison pill.

However, I do agree that there's no need to panic yet. Stephane Dion is allegedly supposed to grow a pair over the long Christmas break, and says he wants a pre-budget election (i.e. ~February). Considering Harper is unlikely to ram this through committee, or Parliament for that matter (as there are bills much more important to him--namely, ones that will embarrass the Liberals), this bill is likely going to die on the order paper. So I agree with your final opinion, just for different reasons.

Magic 8-Ball says: I don't think so (1)

rtrifts (61627) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620103)

I don't think this minority government will be passing that legislation, ever.

If Harper and his cronies want to suggest supporting DMCA -sans any rights for voters - just to keep Hollywood happy is akin to a non-confidence vote, he's welcome to try that argument with voters.

I'm guessing that won't happen.

Don't Tell Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21620341)

Michael Liberal Geist

Yep, thought so. yawn.

Don't forget to cc Scott Brison (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21620347)

When emailing and mailing your concerns to Jim Prentice, don't forget to cc your comments to Scott Brison - Liberal Industry Critic. It's important for the opposition parties to see the groundswell against this legislation so they can hold the Prentice's feet to the fire in the House of Commons

Here is the *REAL* page that counts. (1, Informative)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620443)

Here is the important page:
LEGIS info -- 39th Parliament - 2nd session (from Oct. 16 on) House of Commons Government Bills [parl.gc.ca]
This is where you see the bills passed for the parliament review. As of now (Dec 7), there is no mention of any intellectual property/copyright bill.
This is a page to watch!

Re:Here is the *REAL* page that counts. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21620521)

Thanks. Wickedly awesome page ... I just bookmarked it.

Mod +1111111!!!!!!!oneONEELEVEN!!!! Informative

It's now mentioned now on the notice paper (3, Insightful)

Geof (153857) | more than 6 years ago | (#21620825)

The bill was listed on the Parliamentary notice paper [parl.gc.ca] and scheduled to be introduced on Monday, though it may end up on Tuesday:

Notice Paper
No. 34
Monday, December 10, 2007
11:00 a.m.

Introduction of Government Bills

...

December 7, 2007 -- The Minister of Industry -- Bill entitled "An Act to amend the Copyright Act".

mod dow5N (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21620501)

Arrggg!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21621081)

And to think I voted for this a-hole :(
You better believe I'm going to be at Jim Prentice's office tomorrow during his holiday open house!

OMG (1)

sctaylorcan (1003944) | more than 6 years ago | (#21621177)

Run DMC eh?
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>