Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Canada Piracy News

MPAA's Dodd Secretly Lobbied For a Canadian DMCA 79

Posted by Soulskill
from the empire-must-feed dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Canadian government is expected to pass copyright reform next week. The bill's anti-circumvention rules are a mirror image of the DMCA, leading many to conclude that the government simply caved to U.S. led lobbying pressure. Now Michael Geist provides the evidence — a secret series of unreported meetings between MPAA head Christopher Dodd and Canada's foreign minister, heritage minister, and a senior industry official, just weeks after the bill was introduced and days before SOPA landed in the U.S."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MPAA's Dodd Secretly Lobbied For a Canadian DMCA

Comments Filter:
  • FROSTY P!ZZ (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    This guy is a douschebarg

  • by chispito (1870390) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:21PM (#40338265)
    More than one acronym in a story title is confusing.
    • Dodd is not an acronym - it's Chris Dodd who used to be a democrat senator.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Dodd is not an acronym - it's Chris Dodd who used to be a democrat senator.

        That's funny. I thought DODD stood for "Denial Of Due Diligence"?

    • by chrismcb (983081)
      "Motion Picture Association of America's Dodd Secretly Lobbied For a Canadian Digital Millennium Copyright Act" Yes you are right, the uncommonly spelled out names of some VERY common acronym's make the title much more readable.
  • by doconnor (134648) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:25PM (#40338303) Homepage

    "the government simply caved to U.S. led lobbying pressure"

    It's not like the Conservatives where in any way reluctant to do exactly what large US corporations wanted.

    • by Phrogman (80473) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:01PM (#40338683) Homepage

      Give our Canadian politicians - particularly the Conservatives, but obviously including the Liberals in the past - they give good results when properly paid for their services.
      You are right though, its merely in imitation of the US model for effective (Corporate) Government :(

      • by Ironhandx (1762146) on Friday June 15, 2012 @05:00PM (#40339327)

        The difference is the Liberals choose where they get their bribes from rather more wisely than the conservatives. The liberals would bargain away less and get more out of it for themselves, these conservatives are giving away canadian rights hand over fist and seem to be getting very little in return so far.

    • by Sarius64 (880298)
      Yes, you got us. Dodd and his previous sexual assaulting buddy Ted Kennedy were secretly conservatives. Now you may go on with your life.
    • He was a LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC senator from Connecticut for 30 years. He is a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

      He was also buddy-buddy with the big bankers, taking loads of their money, in the years leading up to the recent crash while he was Chair of the Senate Banking Committee.

      He flat-out lied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in no danger in order to avoid them being more heavily regulated, all the while taking money from them. He pushed through legislation favorable to Countrywide F

      • by dryeo (100693)

        The party doesn't matter, if he came from a red state then he would be a Conservative Republican doing exactly the same thing. These assholes choose their party based on odds of getting elected, not personal believes.
        Sadly politics attracts assholes like Dodd and they're usually unscrupulous enough to get elected.

        • by Quila (201335)

          The party doesn't matter

          Actually, it does. For the most part, the Democrats are the ones who take money from and kowtow to the MAFIAA, and the entertainment industry in general. The Republicans have other corporate owners.

          These assholes choose their party based on odds of getting elected, not personal believes.

          So that's why Scott Brown campaigned for "Teddy Kennedy's seat" as a Republican. That seat was a sure fire Democrat win. It had been Democrat for over 60 years, and so solidly Democrat that Teddy kill

  • Criminal (Score:5, Insightful)

    by soundguy (415780) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:27PM (#40338331) Homepage
    There's no possible way a guy this scummy was even remotely honest during his time in the senate. Everything he ever did there should be investigated for possible corruption and racketeering. If he EVER had an ounce of integrity, I'm sure he sold it to the highest bidder at the earliest opportunity.
    • Re:Criminal (Score:4, Funny)

      by NIN1385 (760712) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:38PM (#40338425)
      There's no possibility any senator was even remotely honest during their time in the senate. FTFY
      • Re:Criminal (Score:5, Funny)

        by dnahelicase (1594971) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:36PM (#40339095)

        There's no possibility any senator was even remotely honest during their time in the senate. FTFY

        No, it's completely possible. The idea that there could be honest, intelligent senators has been around for years. I mean, think about it, with all the senators that get elected over time - they have to exist!

        Just because we haven't observed them yet doesn't mean they don't exist

        • by Shagg (99693)

          Honest politicians can't get elected.

        • Just because we haven't observed them yet doesn't mean they don't exist

          Then again, what is the likely hood we will find the Bosen Higgs particle first? The other possibility is that they break down before entering the political collider?

      • In the book "Chief of Station, Congo: Fighting the Cold War in a Hot Zone", the author mentions that Chris Dodd visited his station there, and he devotes a couple of paragraphs to the fact that he thought Dodd was a total dick. Basically his recollection was that Dodd was asking him questions, but they weren't really questions, he had some kind of stupid agenda, and all in all, he was left with a bad taste in his mouth from the encounter.
    • Re:Criminal (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Loosifur (954968) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:33PM (#40339079)

      Well, Chris Dodd was implicated in a lot of sketchy business involving the subprime mortgage stuff. A lot of conflict of interest type things that seem to happen pretty often in Congress. Like he took a bunch of money from Fannie and Freddie, then trumpeted how financially healthy they were, right before they had to be entirely taken over by the Fed. He had some kind of involvement with Countrywide Financial, he had some tie to Bear-Stearns, and there was some flap about the AIG bailout, the details of which I don't recall. But, basically, during his time in Congress he had a lot of ties to a lot of financial institutions that have been under scrutiny for being awful, and he himself has benefited from these ties in ways that look at least a little bit sleazy. Granted, that could describe a lot of Congress, but that's the deal with him in particular. He's been a little bit of a scumbag well before he left Congress, and it's no surprise he remains a bit of a scumbag.

      Honestly, if the Pirate Party could pay off his mortgage, he'd probably scupper the MPAA. The nice thing about people who can be bought is that they can be bought by anyone.

      • Granted, that describes a lot of Congress

        FTFY.

        I saw mention today that there are 10 financial industry lobbyists per Congressman. Clearly that kind of money wouldn't be spent if it didn't get results.

      • by Nugoo (1794744)

        The nice thing about people who can be bought is that they can be bought by anyone.

        Problem is, the bad guys have more money.

    • by hemo_jr (1122113)

      I'm not sure how reassuring it is that Canadian politicians are as corrupt as those in the US.

  • WTF Canada? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Das Auge (597142) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:30PM (#40338357)
    I thought you were better than this. You have the best privacy laws in the world.

    I hope they find a way to stop it. It's not too late is it?

    Disclosure: I'm American and have been jealous of Canada's privacy laws for years. Now I just feel sad for them.
    • Gov dont govern this world, its the big capitalist industry that govern it. This is an obvious statement but any corp or organisation that has either political power or money (a shit load) can dictate the government to it's knee's and unfortunately all they have to do is follow their rules.... unfortunately. This time of age is becoming very sad. Thank god we still have our faithful hackers. They don't care about idiot drm or laws, they will ignore it. So no matter what these laws will do, the people will a
    • Re:WTF Canada? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:48PM (#40338537)

      Yes, I'm a Canadian and very proud of the priviledges I enjoy. Sometimes I forget how lucky I am, and think that the freedoms I enjoy apply to many other free countries around the world. When I read slash, usually I'm shaking my head on rights abuses in China, the USA or the UK. Not this time!

      Sadly, all it takes is one bad government to steamroll legislation through and shut down all opposition. Just when I think our politicians can't get any worse, it does.

      Our current government is so uncanadian, but I fear few Canadians have the ability to stop this insanity. Foreign corporations own most of Canada, and it seems most Canadians are too nice to stand up and make sacrifices to stop this insanity.
      Most that I have met have fallen to the "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" trap, and have sold their souls out of ignorance or despair.

    • Re:WTF Canada? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 15, 2012 @05:40PM (#40339725)

      I thought you were better than this. You have the best privacy laws in the world.

      I hope they find a way to stop it. It's not too late is it?

      Disclosure: I'm American and have been jealous of Canada's privacy laws for years. Now I just feel sad for them.

      The problem was that Harper was given a majority government (becaues the Liberals self-imploded).

      Now he's shown his hidden agenda - he's no more a conservative than a corporatist hell-bent on throwing Canadians under a bus as long as it makes some corporation a profit. (See oil pipelines, see omnibus budget bill that is probably very little about budget and more about amending environmental laws to shove a pipeline through BC), etc. And of course, nice laws to make sure that environmental groups are heavily audited for "foreign funds" (despite lobby groups taking of said out-of-country money as a good thing).

      Of course, it started before when he renamed the Government of Canada to "Harper Government", and the way he's been doing stuff, really "Harper Dictatorship" - Harper's way or the highway. (Note to self: Start Googlebomb for Harper that autocompletes to that.)

      Hell, supposedly he's brainwashed his MPs as well - there was one who wanted to vote against the budget (and said there were probably a dozen more Conservative MPs who felt the same way) and got a stern talking to as "Independents never get their way".

      Of course, given Harper's majority is a slim one, if there really were that many people wanting out, becoming independent would make them the most powerful people in the House as Harper would have a minority government.

      Harper wants it done, and he'll get his way. And he really wants the copyright law, ACTA, SOPA, DMCA, because he's been convinced it's Good for the Economy(tm) and Jobs(tm) because the US says so. I expect the privacy laws to go next because they're getting in the way of doing business. And he must be right because Canada is doing better economically than the US and Europe, and thus his leadership is superior.

      Sad fact is politics in Canada has positioned him to be basically the leader for the rest of his life - the Liberals are gone, the NDP has its own issues.

      • by Livius (318358)

        Actually, "Harper Government" is actually the correct way to describe his ministry, since we speak the Queen's English in Commonwealth countries.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I hope they find a way to stop it. It's not too late is it?

      Unfortunately, the current Canadian government has an absolute mandate by 24% of the population to do whatever corporate multinationals tell them to do.

  • What?! (Score:5, Funny)

    by rgbrenner (317308) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:30PM (#40338361)

    What?! Dodd, as head of an organization than wants a DMCA law in Canada, lobbied the Canadians for a DMCA law? You don't say

    I've never heard of such a ridiculous thing... It's like he was doing his job or something. Who the hell does that?!

    • What?! Dodd, as head of an organization than wants a DMCA law in Canada, lobbied the Canadians for a DMCA law? You don't say

      I've never heard of such a ridiculous thing... It's like he was doing his job or something. Who the hell does that?!

      Hitmen. They take their jobs very seriously.

    • Re:What?! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by whisper_jeff (680366) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:59PM (#40338663)

      It's like he was doing his job or something. Who the hell does that?!

      Certainly not Canadian politicians who are supposed to represent the will of the Canadian people rather than sell the country out to foreign corporate interests...

  • by cvtan (752695) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:33PM (#40338393)
    Is it really necessary to go through all this to prevent people from stealing songs worth $.99? Surely prevention of bank robbery or sketchy investing is more important. Nearly any crime you can think of is more important! There are so many things that are screwed up and people get worked up about this? Sigh.
    • The music industry has been putting pressure on the Canadian (and lots of other country btw) government to use more restrictive laws for years. ironicaly, it is worth all the trouble for them. I say ironically because they still an old system which is barely hanging on life now a days. We've seen it recently with the sales of digital music. It seems that industry is having lots of trouble adapting to either new technologies or new ways to get people to spend money on artist or music. It's a shame really.
    • by Shagg (99693) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:11PM (#40338777)

      Is it really necessary to go through all this to prevent people from stealing songs worth $.99?

      No, but that's not what the RIAA/MPAA are really worried about. Their model is based on the power that being a distribution monopoly gives them. It is necessary to them to go through all of this to prevent any threat/competition to that monopoly, such as P2P.

    • by poetmatt (793785) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:25PM (#40338977) Journal

      No. This is what you do when you want to *go out of* business, not the other way around. The harm these bills have to every nation that passes them is exponentially greater than any amount than any individual recording/music industry stands to gain.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      In Canada, copyright infringment is not even technically a CRIME, (they are, of course, trying to change this).

  • Strange (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JWW (79176) on Friday June 15, 2012 @03:38PM (#40338431)

    I always find it interesting how moralizing and condescending the MPAA can be to citizens of so many countries, then they turn around and provide products, which in their minds we "must buy" that glamorize and criminals and gangsters.

    I really believe there ought to be a law that bans movie studios from making movies about violating the law.

    Actually, no I don't believe that. But I be willing to trade a promise from the studios that they can continue to make movies about criminals ONLY IF THEY STOP LOBBYING FOR LAWS THAT MAKE EVERYONE A CRIMINAL!!!

  • They are as bought and paid for as politicians in the US. But in the end it's just more stupid laws that will be widely ignored by pretty much everyone. Like so many others.
  • by John Hasler (414242) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:16PM (#40338839) Homepage

    Do you mean that it is exactly like the DMCA including the safe harbor provision, or that it is the DMCA, reversed? Neither seems likely.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      The anti-circumvention rules are a mirror image of the DMCA, otherwise the bill is very different. Of course, in almost every single section granting user rights (with the exception of the computer security section, IIRC) has a statement to the effect of, "Not withstanding section {anti-circumvention}, the individual is allowed to".

      You can read the bill here [parl.gc.ca] if you're inclined.

      Mind you, I've asked my local MP why he feels I should receive a two year jail term simply because I want to format shift a DVD to

    • by Anonymous Coward

      It's more of a "funhouse mirror" version. For example, it explicitly grants new rights, such as format-shifting; while making circumvention of DRM illegal, including if you try to exercise those new "rights". Oh, look, we can legally copy DVDs to other devices ... if they aren't CSS encrypted. When the previous version of the bill was presented it made for an entertaining press conference when the minister responsible tried to explain how it was supposed to work. This time I don't even think they bother

    • by Mashiki (184564)

      Interestingly enough this law will most likely get stuck down by the SCC considering we have fair dealing in play here.

      • by dryeo (100693)

        I've heard it'll get struck down as it passes off IP as property and property is the domain of the provinces. So in other words, if IP is actually property, then the federal government does not have jurisdiction.

  • by arthurpaliden (939626) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:49PM (#40339213)
    So it appears that Canadian members of Parliament are about to make themselves and all their relatives criminals. Interesting.
  • Funny how the story leaves out his party. If he was a republican, it'd be written in Iraqi blood on the title.

    They told me if I voted for McCain, I'd see former senators running the MPAA and pressuring other nations into the interests of media companies... and they were right!

  • by Freddybear (1805256) on Friday June 15, 2012 @05:18PM (#40339513)

    It's a little old fashioned, but those old-timers knew how to get the point across.

    • by Maow (620678)

      It's a little old fashioned, but those old-timers knew how to get the point across.

      Yes, but we're quickly getting to the 4th box to use in the defense of our liberty:

      There are 4 boxes to use in the defence of liberty:
      1) soap, 2) ballot, 3) jury, 4) ammo.
      Use in that order.

      Unbelievable how quickly things can change! Not that I cared for the previous governments, but we've had a Quiet Revolution^w^w Silent Coup here, complete with rampant election fraud.

FORTH IF HONK THEN

Working...