Canadian Minister Promises to Fix Copyright Law 569
Mashiki writes "In Canada, we can download Mp3's and their assorted goodness without too much of a hassle, recently the CRIA and their friends lost the court case. Well, it would appear that the new Federal Heritage Minister Helene Scherre, has spoken and those words were: 'As minister of Canadian Heritage, I will, as quickly as possible, make changes to our copyright law.'"
CDR Tax (Score:5, Interesting)
/not canadian
If you're in Canada (like me) reminder her... (Score:5, Interesting)
The battle rages (Score:5, Interesting)
Malcolm has the right idea (Score:5, Interesting)
"I think it's a challenge for the industry, to try and find a new way to survive."
This lends creedence to many a
My hats off to him, especially given his previous quote, "Whether people download or not, as long as they're listening to music."
* Yes, I'm a Canadian. Paul Martin has yet to earn my respect.
Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
"Whether people download or not, as long as they're listening to music," he said.
"I think it's a challenge for the industry, to try and find a new way to survive."
Wow I've never heard that from someone outside of slashdot, now we just need american idol singers to say that, and maybe nsync and britney spears, then MAYBE (doubtfull) people would listen.
What really kills me is that Bill Mahr (I think he's really funny and I love his show on HBO) calls downloading music stealing just like tons and tons of other people. It isn't stealing, you can't steal something by copying it, I wish more people would understand that. It's copyright infringment, not stealing.
WTF???? (Score:5, Interesting)
So in what world is putting a file that you do _NOT_ own the copyright on, and have not actually obtained permission from the copyright holder to copy for purposes beyond fair use, in a publicly shared folder for others to obtain _not_ a violation of the copyright act?
Downloading copyrighted materials may be perfectly legal in Canada (albeit unethical IMO, since one is aiding another in violating copyright), but it makes no sense to even _BEGIN_ to tolerate uploading whenever and wherever you can positively ascertain that it is occurring.
Good call, except... (Score:3, Interesting)
The court decision inspired panic in the Canadian music industry; industry spokesmen were predicting the collapse of copyright control would cause severe financial hardship for people making their living from music.
If only the people making their living weren't suffering at the hands of labels and record companies/associations already, I might even agree with the people on this side (the CRIA) of the fence.
We all know that artists who don't make enough drama or news to get endorsements, major deals and huge publicity, already have a difficult time making their money from their music alone.
Sharing's legal, distribution ain't... (Score:5, Interesting)
Basically, if you leave a copy machine in a room full of copyrighted books, no copyright violation has been comitted. Now, that copy machine could certainly be used in infriging ways, and it can also be used in a few ways that are okay under fair use. But if the machine just sits there and nobody uses it at all... then there's no way there's any infinging use could have happened.
Translated to the digital world, a server that is offering files up for download can't infringe any copyright until somebody actually accesses the files to make an illegal copy. And this brings up a Catch 22 for the "copyright police"... see, in order to actually prove that there was a download they either have to either intercept a download in progress (good luck doing that...) or they have to initiate a download themselves, but whoops... if the copyright owner tries to download their own work, they can't possibly infringe on themselves!
So, basically, there's a problem in the law that's driving the "copyright police" crazy... short of the copyright pirate confessing, how are they gonna prove that an actual violation took place?
Re:No power. (Score:5, Interesting)
This is very bizarre, isn't it. In my country, alcohol is treated in this way: artificially high taxes (meant, in this case, to keep consumption down - for national health reasons, they say), and laws against making your own (for the same reasons, manage consumption).
Ok, the analogy might not be perfect - but shall we treat music as a barely legal drug?
Re:WTF???? (Score:3, Interesting)
But putting a copyrighted file that you have not received permission to distribute in your shared folder *IS* unauthorized distribution, no matter how you slice it. It becomes illegal the moment you publically share the file, even if nobody has yet downloaded it because you have assumed for yourself a right or permission that can only be granted by the copyright holder.
Re:WTF???? (Score:5, Interesting)
The actual ruling read more like an extreme interpretation of "plausible deniability". Basically, while we geeks might laugh at the idea of "accidentally" leaving files in a shared directory, the masses of computer users often really don't understand the difference between what makes the choice of where to keep their music legal or illegal. Additionally, as several of the RIAA's suits showed, some people believe that paying for Kazaa means they have paid for access to the music.
Sounds stupid? Sure, to us. But if the majority of people doing this honestly do not understand whether or not they have broken the law, the law becomes essentially unenforceable. As one possible Devil's Advocate situation, I can imagine someone installing Kazaa for some random legal purpose, then deciding to store all their own legally ripped music in the directory Kazaa conveniently made for them.
Downloading copyrighted materials may be perfectly legal in Canada (albeit unethical
Actually, I'd disagree about the "unethical". Canada has really quite high taxes on all blank recording media, a sort of "we assume you'll copy our stuff, so get your money in the blanks" approach to piracy. Thus, since the punishment comes built-in to the media itself (whether or not they use it to pirate music doesn't change the "tax"), you could reasonably call it perfectly moral to go ahead and commit a crime already paid for.
Re:Share and Care (Score:3, Interesting)
"However, at the same time, it must be noted that more c90% of proceedings from CD sales go to the record labels."
For what it's worth, it's a little different down here in the US. A CD that you see in the store for US$12.50 was sold into distribution for about $8.00 -- so about a third of the price you pay goes to the channel.
You're correct that the record label collects that roughly $8.00 at which the CD is sold into the sales channel, but in most cases, 100% of that $8.00 ends up going to somebody's salary, whether they work at the CD pressing plant or they're the engineer behind the board or they're the graphic artist that did the artwork. When you phrase it in the form "sales go to the record labels" it may give the impression of going into some vault somewhere. The distribution, sales and marketing of hard goods may be inefficient, but inefficiency != evil.
"The vast majority of artistes vehemently support electronic means of music distribution over the CD method."
Interesting, I didn't know somebody'd taken a poll. Do you have a citation for that statistic? Does that count signed as well as unsigned artists? The A&R guys see so many demo CDs -- from more artists than they could possibly sign -- that I just don't see the math working here.
Re:If you're in Canada (like me) reminder her... (Score:5, Interesting)
Record labels and stores make most of the money from CD sales in stores while most musicians make their money from CD's and merchendise sold at the side of the stage at live events. Attendance is determined by the popularity of the band and without p2p filesharing, many Canadian bands wouldn't be as well known as they are. Canada is a sparsely populated landmass and it's expensive to tour. mp3's are the best way to reach the most people to boost attendance. So are you truly looking out for my best interests (I'm a Canadian musician with 3 Cd's in stores) or are you catering to the labels lobbying for legislation?
Re:Gee... (Score:5, Interesting)
From the beginning of CD times, the price to manufacture a CD record has gone down all the time. Yet I haven't witnessed a single price drop in CD prices. Somehow the laws of supply and demand don't work in the record industry and I fail to see how this is not a monopoly/cartel. Think about it: Same companies all over the world. About the same price levels everywhere, regardless of record company or country.
Yes, I do believe politicians are indeed "fixing" things for the record industry. What else is new? Recording industry is just too powerful. The real question is what to do about it. My ignorant answer is that bands should become independent entreprenours and forget about the record companies altogether. 100% is a lot more than 5% or 10% even if you lower your prices a bit. I don't know what the current percentage of profits for the bands is but I do believe some the OSS principles could be applied to the music industry and the rest would be pretty simple to work out with common sense. Or then I'm puffing on the wrong ciggie again.
Watch Out... (Score:2, Interesting)
You guys are this close to getting voted off the continent. Yeah, I saw Mexico's confessional the other week, and they're just itchin' to cut you Canucks off.
In all seriousness, for as fun as it is to rip on Canadians, being a (United States of) American myself, in the last few years I've come to appreciate Canada a lot more. Despite the fact that we share so much of our culture (Quebec residents excluded), this only serves to highlight some of the differences in our attitudes and our social and political systems. Sure, Americans find a lot of little things about Canada weird (mounties, mooses, and Manitoba, to name a few), but I think Canadians have been a great check on our sanity as of late. A lot of Americans like myself look to those funny guys up north and think, you know, if they go for public health care and sit out aggressive invasions, there's hope for us, too.
Which brings us to copyright law. The recent ruling seemed an inspiring victory, not necessarily for filesharing, but for users' right to privacy on the Internet. I really hope that all you Canadians out there manage to fend off this current threat. Ideally, I'd like to see Larry Lessig's system, wherein musicians are paid directly a share of general royalties collected based on their popularity (a la ASCAP), implemented somewhere (you could even start funding the royalty pool with the levy on blank CDRs). Who knows, if it works out well enough, maybe we'll even steal the idea (a la Lorne Michaels, Dan Akroyd, Mike Myers, etc.). Good luck, my Canadian friends.
(Just a side note: I'm a Michigander, which is about as close to a half-breed as you can get. If any statements seem incongruous, consider them sufficiently explained.)
Re:CDR Tax (Score:3, Interesting)
My Letter to Ms. Scherrer (Score:5, Interesting)
Paul Martin's email: Martin.P@parl.gc.ca
Honourable Ms. Scherrer;
I have heard your recent comments about seeking to change the Copyright Act.
I would urge you to consider very carefully what steps are taken in any changes to this act. As the act stands, Canadians pay a levy on
recordable media, money from which specifically goes to the music industry in compensation for supposed lost revenues.
As such if the law is changed, I would also expect any media levies to be immediately lifted, as the proper method for handling any cases
of copyright infringement would then fall to the music industry and the legal system of Canada, and not to a discriminatory levy applied
to the majority of law-abiding citizens.
Beyond this, the issue of whether revenues are lost at all is entirely debatable, as you can see in this story from the Washington Post
citing a study done by two university researchers specializing in economics:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story
I realize that I am not of your riding, but I have been a Liberal voter for many years now, even though I live in Calgary, Alberta. I
am probably one of the few Liberal voters here.
However, this issue of copyright is a very important one to me because those countries that address the issue properly stand to be at the
fore-front of the information economy. Limiting information flow to prop up business models that simply are no longer feasible is not the
way to go about this. While I do not support the policies of the Conservatives, your actions on this issue will certainly be enough to
determine whether I decide to place my vote in a party other than the Liberals in the coming election.
I do not feel that I am alone.
Thank you for your time.
Name & Address Stuff
Re:Malcolm has the right idea (Score:3, Interesting)
This doesn't really negate your point, but I did want to offer a small correction here. The business itself is relatively sound. People want music. The RIAA and similar organizations provide the music. What's in danger is not this business, it's the distribution of it. Selling entire albums at a premium price is dying. That doesn't mean the music industry is going to go with it, though.
If they're smart enough to embrace the change, rapidly, they'd already have the artists, money, and channels to get it off the ground so fast that somebody else wouldn't be able to easily worm their way in.
Again, not trying to negate your point here. I just don't think the RIAA's going to disappear any time soon unless they keep suing their customers.
Canadian Blank Media Levy info (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, just like the library (Score:3, Interesting)
I think that those who compared the sharing with installing a photocopier in the library are on to something. The trick questions is: what is distribution? IMHO, we should re-evaluate what consitutes a "distribution", given that it became so cheap an simple with the advent of the Internet.
Just like people noted before, when I share a file on a p2p network, I'm not really distributing it. Every downloader had to 1. get a computer 2. get an Internet connection 3. get a p2p client 4. find the file 5. initiate the downloading. Understandably, there's an illusion of a distribution here, because a p2p network beats any library by its size, and all of them put together by its content, but I am still willing to argue that downloaders do more for the "distributing" than the sharers.
Sharing was made possible by a technology that could not be envisioned when the copyright law was created, and we won't get far by suing people who engage in it. A legal change is what we desperatly need: a kind of a copyright law that would allow artists to get paid, while all people are able to share the information in an unrestricted manner, for non-commercial purposes. I'm am of opinion that art will survive even if we go all the way and declare information free, but heck, I'll settle for a voluntary collective licensing [eff.org] scheme too.
Having said all that, the minister seems to be moving in just the opposite direction, but after I've seen RIAA, I'm not surprised anymore...
Re:If you're in Canada (like me) reminder her... (Score:2, Interesting)
Don't forget about the mritimes, too. There are a few big cities there and they're VERY receptive to anyone from outside the maritimes who tours there because they're kinda isolated in some ways. But yeah, a "big" city in the maritimes isn't like a "big" city in ON or PQ so I can see how they didn't make your list.
Re:Slashdot (Score:3, Interesting)
I do not respect the disgusting perversion of copyright that greatly restricts new art based on the old (How many of Walt's classic movies are an entirely new storyline and NOT based on fairy tales, legends, or other earlier works? Steamboat Bill Jr, anyone?). Most art, and perhaps all science, builds on what has been done before. To quote Einstein; "If I have seen further than other men, it is only because I have stood on the shoulders of giants"
I do not respect the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act" (Sonny Bono, etc), a 'copyright' extended so far that any work you see created in your lifetime will not enter the public domain until long after you die.
And I do not respect the DMCA, a disgusting perversion of 'copyright' that restricts what has traditionally been 'unregulated' use. Not just fair use, but 'unregulated use' completely unrelated to the act of 'copying' in any traditional sense. Studying and understanding something that I legitimately bought, or even using something that I OWN in unconventional ways.
I know what I believe in. There's no contradiction here.
Re:Catch 22: Release 2.0 (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Malcolm has the right idea (Score:2, Interesting)
And independent musicians (by this I mean those that are not distributing through the RIAA, whether then have 'made it' or not) will stay around regardless of whether the big music companies go under or not.
Kierthos
Re:CDR Tax (Score:3, Interesting)
Sent to Helene Chalifour Scherrer, Minister... (Score:2, Interesting)
To: The Honourable Helene Chalifour Scherrer, Minister of Canadian Heritage
Greetings Honourable Minister,
I recently read with great dismay your new initiative to make file sharing of music over the internet illegal. I'm sorry to use such harsh language, but that is the stupidest idea ever. I understand your intent to protect Canadian music, after all that is the very purpose of your office, but what you are proposing will create thousands upon thousands of Canadian criminals overnight.
Your initiative is also something that criminologists call an "unenforceable law." There are potentially more than a million Canadians currently sharing music files on the internet, it would be utterly impossible for any law enforcement agency to ever enforce such a ridiculous and freedom stripping law.
Pierre Trudeau once said that the government has no business being in the bedrooms of the nation. I would take that sentiment further: The government has NO business or right to tell me what I can or cannot do with files that are on my computer.
Your suggested changes to the law would not help protect Canadian heritage or music in any way shape or form; it will simply ensure more profit for huge American record companies. Last time I checked, the name of the ministry you are the head of is "Ministry of Canadian Heritage" not "The Ministry of Protecting American Economic Interests in Canada."
If you persist in attempting to draft such a law I will campaign against you specifically, and your party in general with as much strength as I can muster. I'm quite certain that Prime Minister and Liberal Party Leader Paul Martin would not like the campaign slogan "Helene Chalifour Scherrer wants to put your children in prison" plastered everywhere during the upcoming election.
Hoping you give this a sober second thought,
X
vast majority == wrong (Score:3, Interesting)
Reply from an author (Score:3, Interesting)
You were quoted as saying " I will, as quickly as possible, make changes to our
copyright law", in response to concerns expressed by the Canadian music industry.
As an author, I strongly support strong copyright protection against professional
thieves, but you should be aware that the so-called "sharing" on the internet has
increased the sales of my book and others. Readers go out and buy the printed
version, as it's far more convenient and portable than a computer.
I therefor support having my book available to "share", as it's to my financial
benefit, and that of my publisher.
I see the same thing happening with music. I strongly suspect that playing
music on the internet is financially advantageous to the artists and publishers.
As I'm elderly I don't download music: I listen to the CBC and buy CDs I like.
My younger friends say they listen on-line and then buy CDs. I don't have sales
figures for CDs that I do for my book, but a recent study by two academics who
do have the figures showed that the downloading has not done any detectable
harm.
The study, "The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales An Empirical Analysis",
by Felix Oberholzer and Koleman Strumpf concluded "Downloads have an effect
on sales which is statistically indistinguishable from zero
with claims that file sharing is the primary reason for the recent decline in music
sales." That reports is available at
http://www.unc.edu/~cigar/papers/FileSharing_
I would like to see continuing stringent protection for authors, but suspect
that playing music on the internet is about as dangerous to the artists and
their publishers as playing it on the radio.
I suspect this is much like the furor over VCRs and CD burners, and should
be dealt with the same way, with a levy on blank CDs. I would be quite
supportive of levies, including additional levies, on the CD media and
burners I use.
Sincerely, David Collier-Brown
American living in Canada (Score:2, Interesting)
I've sent my response to Scherrer:
Re:CDR Tax (Score:2, Interesting)
Average age of downloaders??? (Score:2, Interesting)
I might be wrong but I think people who make these laws are going to be in for a ruff ride when it comes to enforcement. They might have to put a lot of minors in jail.
First off I know a lot of youth (14-18 years old) and I visit some web forums for various topics. Now what suprises me is the age of a lot of the people on them. There are a lot of youth. They don't have money, but they have time and access to a computer. They spend a great deal of time on MSN (Hardly any of them have heard of ICQ) chatting, web forums and guess what downloading music.
I also propose that these Music exec's who complain about copyright infrigement should check under their own noses. Are their kids or grandkids engaging in this activity? I can almost certianly say so. Who isn't that is under the age of 25-20 and has a net connection?
What is the average age of a music sharer? I propose that a 80% of the file sharing is done by people under the age of 30 and that 40% or more occurs with people who are under 18 years of age. Especially in Canada where broadband has been around for a long time (6 years where I live).
The other problem with these laws and stuff is that music sharing has been going on for a long time. I was in high school when I was first exposed to it all. I remember what the first version of Internet Explorer looks like. Windows 95 had just come out! Whoo! At the time everyone who was in Visual Communications or who knew about comptuers was into downloading music and making MP3's! This was over 7 years ago! It's been going on a long time. It's embeded into our culture all ready. It's almost too late to change the laws now.
Back when this all started my friends where into Warez as well. I don't know what else to call it. But they downloaded software just for the sake of downloading it. A friend of mine had over 200 applications. Some like lightwave, windows, office, and oddles of games. Probably worth MILLIONS OF DOLLARS if bought retail. He probably had over 20 burned CD's at the time (7 years ago). I don't remember how many MP3 CD's he had but I know it was over 11. When your young you have the time to download all sorts of stuff and learn how computers ect. work.
The other problem is ignorance. Parents have no idea what their kids are doing on their computers. If they can hardly run Word and fight with their printers and don't understand email how can they understand what P2P is or how it works? Let alone know enough to enforce any rules. Removing young people from a computer with a net connection can be very challenging.
I hope someone does a study on the age of the average downloader/uploader. I am sure some interesting stats would come out.
And people Wonder (Score:3, Interesting)
Our government wonders why the 18-25 voting range has such low turn out: It's because we are young, cynical and have lost faith in the way that our political system is supposed to work. No one wants to vote, because there are no good parties to vote for. (Well, for me, the closest i go for is NDP). Now that Paul has decided to take away our electronic freedoms, i wonder how much longer the liberal party will stay in power. My best bet: Until all the older voters die. Best be pumping money into health care Mr.Martin, because your best voting base is dying.
Paul Martin is a FINK
Re:If you're in Canada (like me) reminder her... (Score:3, Interesting)
ergo
Diversity in record stores will flourish without major record labels.
100 CDs were produced because you can now record a CD on a government grant, and then pay a 3rd party to print it. For about $4000 you can set up your own studio (providing you already have the space). Some local stores happily retail the CDs, with the exception of Walmart and Zellers and similar. The big boyz only deal with other big boyz, and try to keep the independent artist out of the loop.
Try asking Walmart to carry your CD... on the one hand they'll tell you they try to support local industries, but when it comes down to it, they only buy from Handlemans, a major distributor. Handlemans will take their cut, and sell your CD if you meet their requirements, which independent artists invariably can't.
The major players want all the profits for themselves, and are manipulating the media and the rules. Unless you've already made it, a major record label won't do a thing for you unless you sign over all your IP. They then get you in a debt trap, that even TLC couldn't get out of with 10million CD sales world wide. When they learn the truth, most people are horrified by the raw deal that artists get.
Think about exactly why Canadians need record labels. What's the point? All they do is advertise and push products, and screw musicians out of a fair share of the profits.
p2p hurts record labels, well, that's what they say. Personally, I think that the real damage p2p does to record labels is far less than they say, but quantifiable none the less. p2p is good for many artists... most artists make money by having people pay $10 to see them. If 100 people come, then you've made $750 after you pay the sound guy.
Re:If you're in Canada (like me) reminder her... (Score:2, Interesting)
Good point. However: WalMart, iTunes, Starbucks.. as these things(*) start to gain momentum and p2p downloading becomes even more popular than it already is, I think we're going to start seeing a very slow erosion of prices in stores and a shift that will put power back in the hands of musicians. I never said it was happening already, nor did I say it would happen overnight. All I said, really, was that downloading will have an effect on the CD sales industry. I believe it's quite a positive one for consumers and for musicians.
The record companies, however, already have a very high markup so they can absorb a bit of a loss pretty easily which will slow the decline in prices as well.
If anything, I think the reason the music industry fights file sharing so hard is not because it hurts cd sales (we already know otherwise) but because it works against their efforts to create those "safe bets" you mentioned.
Another excellent point and I stand corrected. Hopefully, this will cause the record companies to start promoting the bands people are downloading and not the crap they tell us we want to hear. For the record companies to change their ways will take a massive revolution.
(*) Yes, I am aware that these things are paid services, but they will still have an effect on record stores if not record labels.
Stand up for our rights, you lousy politicians! (Score:1, Interesting)