Slashdot Log In
US Group Calls Canada a Top Copyright Violator
Posted by
kdawson
on Wed Feb 13, 2008 09:07 AM
from the got-tubes-and-not-afraid-to-use-them dept.
from the got-tubes-and-not-afraid-to-use-them dept.
eldurbarn tips a CBC story reporting that the US-based International Intellectual Property Alliance claims Canada has joined Russia and China among the biggest violators of US copyright law. Quoting: "The group's report is the latest to urge the US government into pressuring Ottawa to reform copyright laws." As we have previously discussed here, the current Conservative government had planned to introduce a new copyright law, but dissent from the privacy commissioner and a groundswell of public protest delayed that action. eldurbarn adds, "What makes this story so important now is that this pressure is being applied at a time and in a manner that may cause the Canadian government to fall, forcing an election." Meanwhile, on the other side of the rapidly heating debate, Michael Geist blogs about the forces arrayed against a Canadian DMCA. The Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright, which includes a who's who of the telecom, Internet, retail, and broadcast communities, has outlined a list of its copyright reform demands.
Related Stories
[+]
Canada's New DMCA Considered Worst Copyright Law 234 comments
loconet writes "The government of Canada is preparing to attempt to bring a new DMCA-modeled copyright law in Canada in order to comply with the WIPO treaties the country signed in 1997. (These treaties were also the base of the American DMCA.) The new Canadian law will be even more restrictive in nature than the American version and worse than the last Canadian copyright proposal, the defeated Bill C-60. Among the many restrictive clauses in this new law, as Michael Geist explains, is the total abolishment of the concept of fair use: 'No parody exception. No time shifting exception. No device shifting exception. No expanded backup provision. Nothing.' Geist provides a list of 30 things that can be done to address the issues."
[+]
Canadian DMCA Won't Include Consumer Rights 192 comments
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."
[+]
Politics: Geist's Fair Copyright for Canada Principles 43 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Canadian law prof Michael Geist has been leading the charge against a Canadian DMCA including the creation of a Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that now has more than 38,000 members. Having delayed the legislation, he now outlines what Canadians should be fighting for — more flexible fair dealing, a
balanced implementation of the WIPO Internet treaties, an ISP safe
harbor, and a modernized backup copy provision."
[+]
Privacy Commissioner Criticizes Canadian DMCA 72 comments
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Jennifer Stoddart, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, has criticized the proposed Canadian DMCA in a public letter to Jim Prentice, the Canadian Minister of Industry. Specifically, she's asking them not to protect any DRM from circumvention that gathers and transmits personal data, because that would give abusive DRM makers a legal cudgel to use against anyone who exposes them. The proposed bill, which was recently delayed due to heavy opposition, is thought to contain DMCA-style anti-circumvention provisions that would make it illegal to investigate or remove intrusive DRM, even if that DRM was violating Canadian privacy laws."
[+]
News: Canada's Proposed DMCA-Style Law Draws Fire
litui writes "Michael Geist assesses the problems with new copyright legislation presented today. In short, it looks like unless it's heavily contested, Canadians are in for a worse piece of law than the DMCA." CBC News' story quotes one critic, Scott Brison, who warns that enforcing the anti-circumvention clauses of this legislation would turn Canada into a police state — which, considering the pervasive eavesdropping it would take to make sure that people aren't enjoying their rights to fair use (or "fair dealing") of hardware or media, seems like a fair prediction.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
FUCK copyright law. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:FUCK copyright law. (Score:5, Funny)
--
== yetihehe ==
"My totem is too great for your desperate fighting techniques!" - T. Hawk (Super Street Fighter II)
Parent
Re:FUCK copyright law. (Score:5, Insightful)
There are some politicians in the US who don't seem to understand the Canada is a soverign country, not under US rule. Maybe they do understand and are simply peeved about it. As a soverign country we do as we please, and we believe that copyright holders can either charge a copyright levy or sue copyright violators, but not both.
Parent
Sovereignty is overrated. (Score:5, Funny)
As a German, I can just point out that many Americans are in gross violation of German road traffic law (for example, they're overtaking on the right side all the time) as well as German gun regulations. Also, no American carries an ID card compliant with 1-2, PersAuswG (the German ID card law). Those violations have to stop immediately!
Also, most American laws are not written in the German language, which is at odds with the German basic law. What kind of rogue country are the USA?
Parent
Re:FUCK copyright law. (Score:5, Informative)
This is B.S. on many levels. To begin with, in many respects [blogspot.com] Canadian copyright law is stronger than that of the U.S. In any case, Canada has no obligation to conform to the WIPO treaty. Canada has signed the WIPO treaty but has not ratified it. Signing a treaty merely indicates the intention of the then current government. As the Hon. Jim Prentice, the Minister responsible for this file, commented [google.ca], the relationship between signing a treaty and ratifying it is like that between dating and marriage. Nothing is binding until the treaty is ratified, and Canada has never ratified the WIPO treaty.
As to fulfilling treaty obligations, for the US to complain about Canada is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Take the softwood lumber dispute, for example. The US illegally imposed billions of dollars in tariffs and planned, illegally, to give them to US lumber companies. The US consistently lost at the NAFTA dispute panel, even though three of the five panel members were Americans. The dispute was temporarily resolved when the new Conservative minority government gave in to the US in spite of being in the right legally, but the US is making trouble again and there is a good chance that the agreement will not last.
Parent
What makes them think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What makes them think... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What makes them think... (Score:5, Insightful)
The US, being the largest economic superpower (still!), and our largest trading partner, has alot of leverage that they're not afraid of using. You know that softwood lumber dispute? The one that the US lost at NAFTA, WTO, etc time and time again? The US just stonewalled Canada...we eventually conceded some tariffs in the interest of saving our domestic industries, even though by every treaty under the sun we were free and clear.
Canada has a number of laws making copyright work for the benefit of society. I don't agree with all of them, but I understand their purpose. The first is CANCON, laws promoting the distribution of Canadian generated media based on quotas. e.g. Don't meet a quota, you lose your broadcast license.
There's practical exceptions too. Copyright is null-and-void for organisations translating media into formats that make them accessible to visually or audio-impaired individuals. e.g. Library can MAKE books on tape for subjects that might not be commercially availably; or they can reprint large font editions.
I worry that our relaxed personal use copyright laws are in jeopardy on a daily basis. Fortuntely the Canadian government is slightly more accessible to the public than the US congress, so we hve some safeguards in place. (note: i said ~slightly~)
Parent
Breaking American Laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Breaking American Laws (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Breaking American Laws (Score:5, Informative)
(slight edit and emphasis mine)
The RIAA and MPAA are not welcome to a single cent of the tax we pay on blank media. It's a Canadian tax. It goes to the CRIA ( you know, the Canadian Recording Industry Association) (and presumably other Canadian organizations).
Parent
Re:Breaking American Laws (Score:5, Funny)
Which presumably goes to support the likes of Bryan Adams and Celine Dion?
I'd rather it went to the RIAA, MPAA, Microsoft, Al-Qaeda or hell... pretty much anyone!
Parent
How dare Canada introduce the DMCA? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How dare Canada introduce the DMCA? (Score:5, Informative)
It is of course not legal for the UK to reciprocate.
Parent
Non-sense (Score:5, Informative)
Cannada CANNOT break (grammatically error on country placement inserted intentionally) copyright US law, anymore than an US as a country cannot break coypright new-guinea law . What could happen is that somebody could infringe on the copyright held by somebody else in another country, which means (if I recall correctly WIPO) that a Canadian could at most only break a canadian law on respecting other country copyright. A country can only break international Agreement (like WIPO agreement). So the above quoted line is wrong on the citizen [of the country] level, and it is wrong on the country level. Beside that, it is only propaganda from US copyright holder to put pressure on foreign government or require their paid-off US lawmaker to put pressure on those countries.
Not invented here == BAD (Score:5, Insightful)
Please note that Canadian lawyers (who enjoy generally greater social respect) will look at US law and find it similarly lacking. But do not have the insufferable American arrogance to claim their national laws should somehow govern all.
Canada is a different country with different norms and practices. Superficial language similarities mask much deeper fundamental differences. In copyright, Canada has a CD tax to compensate artists for such personal copies. The US does too (Music CD blanks), but it is little enforced.
As long as both the US and Canada conform to WIPO, neither has reasonable complaint of the others' national customizations. Utter arrogance and extraterritoriality to maintain otherwise.
In other news.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see the problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally I'd love it if they called the UK one of the top copyright violators in the world. Unfortunately our goverment seems to think right now that copyright is more important than even the people that employ them - the general public.
Violator of US Law (Score:5, Insightful)
age old recipe applied again and again... (Score:5, Insightful)
It used to be done in secret diplomatic meetings and under a cover of foreign relations when big corporate interests dictated their agenda through government mouthpieces, usually with the threat of military/economic pressure looming in the horizon. Their favorite government of choice to carry their agenda was of course US. Now either because governments are too inefficient to flex rapidly or because vote-counting hasn't been "modernized" yet (Diebold anyone?) and most of all because even the most successful PR campaigns always take a finite amount of time to sway public opinion in desirable directions (e.g. took years to convince americans that Iraq was behind 9/11) corporate interests have taken it upon themselves to apply their gunboat diplomacy.
Who needs official government representatives meeting each other anymore when articles written by a lobby team in the US can bring a foreign government down? What is outrageous to the average
Yeah! Canada wins again! (Score:5, Funny)
You other American law breaking countries never had a chance!
Again? (Score:5, Insightful)
I say "good on them" for sticking to their own copyright system (for now). I can't remember the last time our (British) government did something that stood up against the Americans.
FUCK OFF (Score:5, Insightful)
We are sick and tired of this kind of arrogance.
Re:This seems familiar somehow ... (Score:4, Insightful)
There... fixed it for ya
Parent
Re:Do you smell that? (Score:5, Interesting)
It is basically changing the meaning of the word, "loss." The record companies "lose $511 million per year due to copyright infringement" actually translates to, "had all the songs that were downloaded in a given year been purchased at the current market rate, the record companies would have made $511 million more than they did." For someone who is aware of the economist's meaning of "loss," this is obvious and the record companies don't seem that badly off (imagine if they said that they were actually spending $500 million more than they were taking in; they would be going bankrupt). For someone who is not aware of it, it is deceptive -- it makes it sound like the record companies are in serious financial peril, which is about as far from the truth as claiming that 2+2 = -8 i. That's what the companies want, of course.
Of course, even the economic sense of the word "loss" is dishonest, because the sales probably wouldn't have happened, especially in the case of students or people living in China (where the price of a CD is, for some people, equivalent to 1 week's pay).
Parent