Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Canada Government The Internet Your Rights Online

'Canadian DMCA' Copyright Bill Dead Again 307

An anonymous reader writes "Like some kind of B-movie horror series, the latest attempt to revise Canada's copyright law and introduce DMCA-like provisions, Bill C-32, has again died on the order table as Canada's minority government has fallen after a non-confidence vote. This makes it the third copyright revision bill since 2005 to have died. Although this version was regarded as better than previous ones, it still contained awkward anti-circumvention provisions. We can be confident that some kind of DMCA-style copyright bill will be resurrected, but it will have to wait for the next government sequel."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

'Canadian DMCA' Copyright Bill Dead Again

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Ugh.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 26, 2011 @01:04PM (#35623036)

    When did choosing politicians become just about their bad qualities?

  • Re:Credit (Score:4, Insightful)

    by v1 ( 525388 ) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @01:16PM (#35623094) Homepage Journal

    we were just discussing how the USA could benefit from some of the design of canadian law, and it was decided that canada has safeties built into the system so that in the event that the government does something "batshit insane", that it can be dissolved almost instantly. And that's what has happened in Canada. Lie to parliament and refuse to disclose information, BAM you're outa here. Their parliament is a bit like our congress, but our congress neither has the balls nor the power to pull it off.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 26, 2011 @01:18PM (#35623100)

    They can fail a thousand times, they only need to pass once. They will probably try again in a year and keep trying till people get tired of hearing it or they are distracted by something else until it gets passed and then the government will just refuse to repeal it or drag it out till people forget about the old ways.

    What they need to hurry up and pass is a bill that makes it a law that ALL bills made past that point must have an expiration date where it must come up for review at least once every 10 years and if they miss the review or deny it, it is automatically taken off the books and will put a 10 year time table for all the current laws on the books so they must review each and every law passed and renew/revoke them as needed and check them again every 10 years and make sure they votes are on public record on every issue.

    It would really cut down on the bad, useless and redundant laws already there and force politicians to reevaluate their laws every 10 years under the public scrutiny and their vote will be public knowledge.

  • Re:Ugh.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by margeman2k3 ( 1933034 ) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @01:37PM (#35623208)

    When did choosing politicians become just about their bad qualities?

    When they stopped having any good qualities.

  • Use your brain. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by neiras ( 723124 ) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @01:41PM (#35623232)

    While I think it's good the bill died.. as a canadian I'm a little pissed that we're having another expensive election.

    Expensive election? Give me a break. I'm hearing numbers like 200 million dollars to run an election for the whole country.

    In 2008 [elections.ca] there were 23,677,639 registered voters in Canada. If the number of registered voters remained the same (hint: it has likely increased!), that puts the cost per registered voter at about $8.50.

    I don't know about you, but I would pay $8.50 to have a say in my democracy any day.

    The media in Canada has gone into "nobody wants an election, waaaah waaah" mode for each of the past four elections. I'm a Canadian, and just about everyone I know wants an election. Everywhere I turn online though, someone is bitching about how nobody wants one.

    I know that the media is largely run by conservative businesspeople, but this broad-based attempt at reducing the duties of citizenship to an inconvenience is sickening.

    Stop complaining and vote responsibly. It's all we have. We've had lots of elections in the past 7 years, and that's because the government is weak and Canadians are divided. It's a good thing we keep getting to weigh in.

  • by holophrastic ( 221104 ) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @02:48PM (#35623768)

    Not when it is ineffective. In the current situation, it's my duty to express the futility of the voting process. That too is a duty to be served. How many minority governments in sequence will in take? We're going to find out.

    But seriously, when I skipped a class in high school they suspended me -- telling me to skip an entire day. I spent an amazing amount of time in pool halls. When an election creates a minority government that is ineffective, calling yet another vote among the same parties doesn't make any more sense. Do it enough times and you're certain to get nothing more than a random result.

    Democracy's a joke in a world of expert marketing, and a misinformed public. Why would you have an uneducated vote counted equal to an educated vote? This isn't about electing a leader of a village. The world's gotten bigger, as have the issues. "majority" is meaningless -- the majority smoked, the majority did drugs, the majority can't manage a personal budget, the majority can't use their own computers that they use every day.

    The majority need to be told "slippery when wet". You name for me ten things that aren't slippery when wet, that people encounter in a year. I've even seen signs that say "may be slippery when wet". Thanks for nothing.

  • Re:Credit (Score:5, Insightful)

    by realityimpaired ( 1668397 ) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @04:00PM (#35624230)

    The public financing laws in Canada are responsible for this, not the politicians. Any donation over $20 is a matter of public record (and can't be anonymous), politicians are not allowed to accept more than the personal contribution limit ($1184 last time I checked), and it's illegal for a corporate entity to make a campaign contribution.

    The US could really benefit from rules like that.

  • by thechink ( 182419 ) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @04:38PM (#35624452)

    With no difference of any substance, I care, but don't see any value in voting.

    That's copout to not get involved.

    If Diefenbaker was never elected the Avro Arrow might never have been cancelled
    If Pearson was never elected we might not have Universal Health Care
    If Trudeau was never elected we might not have the Just Society and re-patriated constitution
    If Mulroney was never elected we might not have Free Trade

    Are you saying that these elected men had no substance? Their policies (good or bad) shaped what Canada is today and their influence on everyday life was huge.

    It's easy to get cynical with today's politics but I'd rather have a say in what goes on (not matter how small) than no say at all.

    Some day one of those elected leaders is going to do something that will greatly affect you, what are you going to say then?

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein

Working...