Canadian Gov't Asks Public About New Copyright Law 77
Mike Lawrie writes "The so-called Canadian DMCA has had a long history. Historically, proposed legislation has favoured the views of CRIA, the Canadian arm of the RIAA almost completely. However, this time around the government is consulting the public before drafting the bill. They have launched a (Linux-based!) website designed to provide a public forum for discussion. Now is the time to speak up."
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
With all their beady little eyes
And flapping heads so full of lies
Re:No surprises there (Score:4, Funny)
Odd. Many Canadians refer to Americans as "Upper Mexicans".
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe South Park the musical was to long ago? Today's moderators don't know they're born....
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, enough people are trying to alright. It's already slashdotted.
Re: (Score:1)
Watch as the entire slashdot community matches wits with a few unsuspecting ordinary passers-by on the forums of the Copyright Consultation webpage!
Re:What can I say? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What can I say? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
And it tends not to matter who gets the first word; it's all about who has the last word.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Hey! New meme:
"Last post."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's not off topic. It's the last post in that thread.
Err ... crap.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Don't get too excited just yet. Just because they're soliciting feedback doesn't mean they'll listen to it.
Exactly. They are doing this because bill C-61 was heavily critisiced for not soliciting public opinon. But it's already clear they have no intention to listen. Monday's "Public Copyright Forum" [www.cbc.ca] in Vancouver was announced the Thursday before - giving 4 days notice. It was also announced on twitter(?!?!).
They then spontaneously changed the time from 12:45 to 11:00 or something like that. It was over when I showed up.
How about we leave things as-is? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How about we leave things as-is? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We don't have any WIPO obligations. Canada has signed the WIPO treaty but we have not ratified it. See Howard Knopf's discussion [blogspot.com] of this issue. As he puts it, signing is to dating as ratification is to marriage.
Re: (Score:2)
What's more interesting, how do you file for divorce?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Canada doesn't need any new laws, copyright law is already established, making illegal copies is already illegal. Why do we need any new laws?
The copyright system in most countries is fairly badly broken and the internet revolution has made that a more pressing issue. The point of copyright is to provide incentive for the creation of new artistic works. There are lots of ways copyright can be changed that will do a better job than what currently exists. Laws reducing the length of copyright, fixing how much of copyright can be transferred, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the current forms of copyright hinder the development of new art more than they provide an incentive.
First, if I can live forever on something I once created, why be creative anymore? This applies to companies even more than to normal people, since they are technically immortal and they won't ever create any art "for love" (as a human might, even if he isn't forced to by his hungry stomach). Disney is a perfect example of this. Mickey and Donald will stay protected, possibly forever and a day. Why
Re:How about we leave things as-is? (Score:5, Insightful)
To Cement fair use
To reduce ridiculous copyright lengths
To differentiate between commercial and personal abuse
To ensure that the copyright legislation promotes diversion creation of culture.
Re:How about we leave things as-is? (Score:4, Insightful)
Here are a couple more:
Re: (Score:1)
Simple... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No. Just as patents should provide an incentive to invent and publish, copyright should offer an incentive to create and enrich the arts with your talent, your ideas, your creation, so people can enjoy it.
But we need a balance. Copyright should be an incentive. Not the 'right' to milk something you did half a century ago. Not the 'right' to refuse people its use. Not the 'right' to cripple art so you might get a buck but the art will be lost soon after because it is impossible to create copies of it. And wh
A balance doesn't work... (Score:2)
That's not how Harper does things. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the Harper government you understand. This bill's gonna get passed regardless of what people say. Though maybe he's using the 'Linux-based!' website to woo computer nerds to the cause.
'Well he hates the environment, he's plunged the country into a debt our grandchildren will still be burdened with, he hates gays, minorities, the french, socialists, our healthcare system, Ontario, all of eastern Canada, he refuses to give interviews to any Canadian media but frequently appears on Fox news (which we don't get up here), but he likes Linux, so I guess he can't be all that bad!'
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This is the Harper government you understand. This bill's gonna get passed regardless of what people say. Though maybe he's using the 'Linux-based!' website to woo computer nerds to the cause.
'Well he hates the environment, he's plunged the country into a debt our grandchildren will still be burdened with, he hates gays, minorities, the french, socialists, our healthcare system, Ontario, all of eastern Canada, he refuses to give interviews to any Canadian media but frequently appears on Fox news (which we don't get up here), but he likes Linux, so I guess he can't be all that bad!'
There isn't even a bill yet. The Harper government is asking for public opinion before they draft a bill, and considering the public outcry on the bill that died in the fall election this is not surprising.
PS. Standing up for the strong part of Canada's economy (natural resources) does not make him hate the environment.
Re:That's not how Harper does things. (Score:4, Insightful)
[citation needed]
It's also disingenuous to both complain that the government doesn't consult with constituents, and then to complain about the speculative output of the consultation before you have seen it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You do realize the Liberal's won't be triggering an election over a DMCA law, don't you?
To further clarify this for you. The Liberals will vote for this bill no questions asked because they don't have any issues with terrible new copyright laws. They would be out of their minds to go to the polls over it. (going the polls means voting down a bill which would result in non-confidence in the government and trigger an election)
SO even though the Conservatives only form a minority government, passing this law w
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So what you're saying is, it's Harpers fault the Liberals either don't have a spine or principles? Just want to be sure I'm following what passes for logic from you...
Re: (Score:2)
A spineless politician in power is nobody's fault but the voters'.
Re: (Score:2)
His being in in power is the voters' fault, his being spineless in his own.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Please read the following website before you flap your gums:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?pub=bill&doc=c-60&parl=38&ses=1&language=E [parl.gc.ca]
This was the bill introduced into parliment by the Liberal party which (fortunately) died on the floor with the confidence vote and subsequent election. In many ways Bill C-60 was significantly more draconian than bill C-61 http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=3570473&file=4 [parl.gc.ca].
If you think any Canadian po
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Canadian DRM or DMCA will be the end of whate
For hire (Score:2, Funny)
Actual Submission Page (Score:3, Informative)
http://copyright.econsultation.ca/topics-sujets/show-montrer/18
Answer the questions and email the responses to the address given.
The courts decide (Score:2)
Smoke & mirrors (Score:5, Interesting)
The site was announced on Friday July 17 with the first consultation for Vancouver scheduled the following Monday July 20.
Typical weasel politics and tactics used by Conservatives.
Re: (Score:2)
The Conservatives are the best at it. The Liberals, and the NDP, and the Bloc, and... well the Greens haven't really had a chance to prove one way or the other yet, but anyway they all love saying one thing while doing another, it's just that most people in the other parties here are monumentally bad at it.
For example, if the Liberals did this, they wouldn't put up any site at all, but still claim that they did. When corrected, they would say "it's coming up soon" and it never would. Also they would chalk up $5 million in expenses to the site.
$5 million in expenses, which would go to a guy who lives in the same neighbourhood as the Prime Minister. And even though he's a used car salesman (albeit a very successful one), they will still claim he's the best person they could find for the job.
Pirate Party of Canada (Score:4, Informative)
If you're Canadian and wish to have a positive impact on Copyright, the Pirate Party of Canada [piratepartyofcanada.com] may be your cup of tea.
Copyright comment solicitaion (Score:1)
Of course, any comments you provide to them become their copyrighted material. ;)
They may ask... (Score:2)
And it works time-after-time because of the short attention span public who keeps reelecting them!
Essential to participate in consultation (Score:2)
We don't know. They may not know yet either. Whatever the case, it is essential to take place in the consultation.
Consider the possibilities: a) the consultation is in good faith and they plan to listen, or b) they intend to ignore what people say and use this as cover for a warmed-over imitation of the DMCA.
In case a) participation is obviously worthwhile: the more we consult, the closer the legislation will be to what we want.
My letter (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright, like most things, is a contract between artists and society. Originally, the contract was to allow the use of government resources to prevent publishers from reprinting works without paying the artist their due. There is a monetary cost to society in enforcing copyrights, as well as a cost inherent in the monopoly on works granted by copyright. In ages past, the trade-off for this burden to society was being forced to release the works into the public domain after copyright expired, within a reasonable time limit. Further, governments would only enforce copyrights in civil court, it wasn't a criminal issue, and copyright law was limited to the act of copying itself.
This century has seen unprecedented shift in copyright, where copyright owners are seeing more and more rights, with fewer and fewer responsibilities. All Canadians pay taxes on blank media which is handed to the copyright industry. Copyright terms are now several lifetimes long. Now the copyright industry is trying to make the act of copying a criminal offense, and further making peripheral acts illegal and subject to civil and criminal prosecution.
The perpetuity of copyrights is effectively theft of our own culture. "Happy Birthday To You" is a song first written before the second world war, but singing it in public is technically illegal and will be for another generation. Records from the turn of the last century, songs for example written about the depression or the first world war, are illegal to distribute despite the artists who wrote or sang them being long dead. This affected me personally recently when I found someone's amazing record collection with some incredibly interesting songs about life during the depression, but couldn't share any of the unknown songs I found. It won't be long until the records deteriorate completely, and these pieces of our past are gone forever.
Copyright today isn't structured to foster creativity, it's structured to allow companies to build portfolios. The same chilling effect I felt when I wanted to share the old songs with others is felt with artists, musicians, and writers who want to pull from old sources to build upon their own works. When our past culture is stolen, our own present culture becomes transient and loses a lot of value. Scriptwriting would lose tremendously without the works of Shakespeare to draw upon, musicians would lose tremendously without the works of bethoven and bach to draw upon. The current stifling copyright legislation is eradicating more contemporary Shakespeares or Bachs. They disappear into a mist of "Not profitable to sell, not legal to distribute".
Further copyright won't help increase investment in Canada -- Positive conditions for creative workers will, including progressive copyright that allows artists greater freedom to use our history to build their own works. No film company will say "Oh, even though Vancouver is inexpensive to shoot in and very friendly, they haven't criminalised DRM circumvention so we'll go to New York instead".
Ironically, the best thing for everyone would be to continue what was inadvertently started by the copyright industry themselves when they lobbied for the levy on blank media. American film and music companies are now trying to sue their customers into buying media, but this is the worst solution possible -- regular people are finding their lives ruined over a trivial matter, and principled people are no longer buying movies or music because it's unjust to fund such lawsuits. If Canadian laws protected everyone; consumers, new artists, and existing copyright holders, and tried to create a balance rather than simply creating a draconian wall of legislation, I think we'd see more creativity coming from Canada, which would draw the global digital economy into our borders to leverage our talented engineers, technicians, writers, artists, and musicians in a way that more restrictive countries wouldn't enjoy.
well stated (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You've only got it half right. Society is supposed to be compensated by having more higher quality works in the public domain. That's the reason for having limited terms, so we can get our culture back after the person who created it has their time to earn their share.
Re: (Score:2)
If I ever go into politics, can you be my speechwriter?
Re: (Score:1)
Diderot said.. (Score:2, Interesting)
The freedom to write and speak with impunity, is either the sign of the extreme kindness of the prince, or of the profound slavery of people, Only are permitted to speak the ones who can do nothing.