Canadian SOPA Could Target YouTube 231
bs0d3 writes "The music industry is seeking over a dozen changes to Canadian anti-piracy bill C-11, including website blocking, Internet termination for alleged repeat infringers, and an expansion of the "enabler" provision that is supposedly designed to target pirate sites. Meanwhile, the Entertainment Software Association of Canada also wants an expansion of the enabler provision along with further tightening of the already-restrictive digital lock rules. It's concerning that some of these expansions will create a risky situation for legitimate websites, as SOPA did in the U.S. Michael Geist outlines the legal history and complications here."
Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
Looks like the citizens of every country are going to have to stay on careful guard these days. When the music industry loses in one country, they just shift focus to another for a while (then later try to sneak back in under the radar where they lost). I guess they're hoping they have the money to wait everyone out. Sadly, they may be right.
Couldn't someone start a rumor that this bill is anti-French? At least that would get Quebec to come out against it. Of course, that's a pretty dubious ally. But you take what you can get.
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
The SOPA war is far from over. Hell, we're just now seeing the openning skirmishes. Why doesn't the MAFIAA just come out and say 'All yer IP is belong to us' already and be done with it?
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Well, the Great Lakes are pretty big.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, I hear that the crossing between Vermont and Quebec [wikimedia.org] is particularly long and treacherous!
Re: (Score:3)
Aye, many a brave immigrant died trying to reach the new homeland.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep, and when they got there they couldn't understand each other.
Re: (Score:2)
And form a minority of the border. I suppose if you include the great lakes and the St. Lawrence river, there IS water between the parts of Canada and the US that most Americans and Canadians are familiar with.
I like to tell Torontonians and Montrealers that they're not actually Canadians because they live south of the 49th parallel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Canada = Overseas? I know the USA education system has myopic geography but putting an ocean between Canada and the USA......wow.
MAFIAA pushing ACTA in the European Union [techdirt.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Well, MPAA head (and former Senator) Chris Dodd has said that the reason SOPA failed was because people were able to speak their mind and the MPAA didn't have any outlet for "correcting" us. (No outlets at all... Ignore the fact that they own all of those TV stations.) We need to get rid of that pesky freedom of speech for the common folk (aka Consumers). Our only right should be the right to purchase the MPAA/RIAA-approved entertainment materials that the MPAA/RIAA tell us to purchase.
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
The companies which are members of the music and film industry associations of America like to hide behind their RIAA and MPAA acronyms. Turnabout is fair play.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's not. The MPAA & RIAA (aka "MAFIAA") are practicing a form of legalized racketeering, bribery, intimidation, etc. Except rather than having thick-necked goons do the enforcement late at night, they're using slick attorneys and lobbyists to abstract away the dirty work from their hands to the government's.
The "Rule of Law" argument is really nice and all, especially when you're writing all the rules.
Remember, all the seizures of arts in France by the Nazis was "legal", too.
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
That is completely ignoring the fact that media companies grew directly out of the real mafia that ran saloons, music halls, theaters and "distribution" (trucking).
Re: (Score:2)
Oh c'mon! At least the real Mafia provided a service people wanted. What do the current MAFIAA have to offer us that anyone wants?
If the old time mafia weren't offering people what they wanted they would have been shut down before they ever began. No joke.
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
The mafia was involved in music distribution until very recently. Now that the Soviet Union is gone the US government doesn't need the mafia to control unions and bust commie heads so they have cracked down and weakened the mob. But I assure you until the collapse of the Soviet Bloc the mafia controlled music. Have you ever heard of these clauses in music contracts that allow the label to deduct some percent of your sales for "breakage in shipping"? Yes, even in the digital age this mafia era clause still gets in your contract unless you have a good lawyer. I agree with you that "MAFIAA" is kind of juvenile. I prefer the term "media cartels" because it is both technically accurate and an allusion to their criminal past both as mobbed up shipping companies and patent violating movie studios.
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
Except the MAFIAA designation implies more than just one *AA group, and has thus come to refer to all the member of the media cartels. The "Micro$oft terminology" only referenced one company and was actually harder to type than their actual name.
I prefer to simply say MAFIAA, rather than RIAA, MPAA, Business Software Alliance (BSA), Entertainment Software Alliance (ESA), and all the other organizations that have come out in support of SOPA [wikipedia.org]. It may have started out as a jab, but for most, it's come to be representative of the supporters of this crap as a whole outside of the negative connotations of the name.
Re: (Score:3)
The use of terms like "MAFIAA" is as juvenile and distracting as the "Micro$oft" terminology of years past. It dilutes a solid argument and isn't needed.
Not to mention that it is insulting to the mafia to lump them in with the music and movie industries. By comparison extortionists, murderers, drug traffickers and pimps are much more respectable than the MPAA/RIAA.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think MAFIAA is juvenile because it describes their tactics perfectly (sending-out millions of extortionate letters demanding $5000 or else be dragged to court). However it's certainly confusing to newbies so I try to say RIAA/MPAA for clarity.
As for SOPA spreading from the U.S. to Canada to Britain to Australia and so on, I think it's clear that protests won't do crap. We should do to the MPAA CEO what the Libyans did to Gaddafi. That will silence him once and for all (and scare the shit ou
Re: (Score:2)
"They can take our IP's but they can never take our freedom...?"
Other way round.
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Informative)
At least Quebec didn't vote the Conservatives into power...
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that means we can "Blame Canada"
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
borderline racist
French is a race now?
And why was I not told?!?!?
Re:Oh, Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
Troll much?
Quebec voted against the current Conservative government. We massively voted for the NPD, which is a party more interested in social issues and the people. The current party in power who's not listening to Canadian wasn't voted in by Quebec, it was voted in by the rest of Canada. Shocking EH! As a French speaker, born in Montreal, I can tell you that I dislike the "Office de la langue Française" and how they are obcess with protecting the french language and the culture. But who gives a fuck about that, this isn't what C-11 is about.
Seriously, modify your comments with black or jewish people instead of Quebec and ask yourself if you sound too much like a biggot. In Quebec, just like with the rest of Canada, we have protests about stuff that concerns all of us. We had the occupy movements in some of our cities, we had protests against being in Irak. Maybe you live in this world where Quebec is a bunch of separatists who don't care about the rest of Canada or the world, and if so, you've fallen in a bad stereotype, because that's not the case. If it was the case, Quebec wouldn't be part of Canada still, our provincial government wouldn't be the Liberals and we wouldn't have such a diverse culture from all over the world.
So, I hope you'll be more careful in the future, not just about Quebec, but about all cultures and all nations all over the world. Racist comments have no place in this day and age.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunate, but also only partly true. I know that in Alberta, at least - a sea of blue with a single orange riding - we had a lot of split votes. If those people had voted stratetgically, rather than just the party they support, there would have been a hell of a lot fewer Conservative seats. Unfortunately, my riding would have had our douchebag whether everyone else voted strategi
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like the citizens of every country are going to have to stay on careful guard these days.
As opposed to what days? The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." -- John Curran
Re: (Score:2)
Our voices count for even less in Canada than American voices do in the USA.
Boy, if that isn't a fucking terrifying thought...
Re: (Score:2)
"Our voices count for even less in Canada than American voices do in the USA."
How do you figure? Both countries have free elections. And the ones in Canada are governed by functional campaign financing laws and feature parties that represent actual distinct choices.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because, here, the party with a majority can pass anything, there are no levels to restrain a majority party (unless the party falls apart and the party Whip makes sure that doesn't happen).
Canada does really well as long as we have a benevalent leader, but if we don't, then we are screwed. The alternative is for us to have minority governments where they can't pass a law without working with another party; this is what we have had for the past while and so a lot of draconian laws could not be passed/implem
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We'll take their oil sands and their poutine! It's the only way we can possibly make Americans even less healthy!
Re: (Score:2)
Sad, but true :( My local representative is Conservative. Emailing him is like talking to a brick wall. "We won the election, what we're doing MUST be what the people want!"
Nevermind that they didn't even manage 40% of total votes.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, yeah, kill the patient.
Re: (Score:2)
well (Score:4, Funny)
probably it's time to get interested in namecoins...
you know (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:you know (Score:5, Insightful)
"We" voted the fundamentalist Conservative party into majority last year. Probably the ONLY reason bad laws weren't passed the last five years is they'd been kept in check with a minority. Infallible? Canada? Hah!
There's no stopping this crap bill or ACTA this time. The next federal election is 3 years away, people will have forgotten this by then (assuming they haven't been locked up in the new mega-prisons thanks to an massive crime and punishment bill that even Texas Republicans said was unworkable, having tried the same thing themselves and failed miserably).
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt it. Three years is a long time to remember a bill, unless it affects your daily life. And it will. When the RIAA starts pulling it's massive lawsuits up here and people start getting bitten by them, they'll remember. And that's not going to be over in three years.
If they pass this, it might well be the issue at the next election that gets the Conservatives smacked down to reconsider their platform.
except (Score:5, Insightful)
that you exported your shit over there. your idiocy in your own country allowed the private interests to set up a globe spanning racketeering operation.
Re: (Score:3)
that you exported your shit over there. your idiocy in your own country allowed the private interests to set up a globe spanning racketeering operation.
Believe me, if we had the power to stop it, we would.
Just like how if you had the power to stop it, you would.
It's bad enough that the world's governments could give 2 shits what their people think; no need to add insult to injury by being dicks to each other about it.
so then ... (Score:2)
what do we do now ?
reaaaaaaaallly. (Score:2)
you think because people were buying things that they intervene in countries ?
get real.
if people dont buy their things, they make them buy their things through buying politicians and laws to create the exact same environment in usa.
the fact that you think power of wealth is not something infectious, tells me that you are rather young in the ways of this world.
Where the Cons came from.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Look into the history of the top Canadian Conservative Party players. Not the vast majority of Cons that are no more than potted plants, or seals trained to bark and clap for their masters. From the politicians to the apparatchiks to the guys in the third party non-profits, you'll find that the key people are all close to the Republicans.
They've worked under the top republican spinmasters, the top republican spinmasters have worked under them. They've helped campaign for republicans in the US, then come bac
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry bout that, but I didn't send them North.
Re: (Score:3)
You guys have had the DMCA since when? 2001? And have been pushing the rest of the world to adopt something similar ever since. Canada has held out for the last decade.
What was it you were saying about being just?
Re:you know (Score:4, Insightful)
The only reason we held out was because the parties in power at the time (Liberal and Conservative both) were minority governments. Twice, copyright reform bills died when the government fell and an election was called. Last time, the Conservatives knew an election was coming and "listened" to the public outcry and shelved the bill, to give people one less bullet point against them.
Then they got a majority. There'll be no stopping them this time.
Re: (Score:3)
There was the little matter of the heritage and/or industry ministers responsible for those bills getting either outright fired or "reassigned to another portfolio."
Harper's not an idiot. If there's enough outcry against this, he'll drop it. If not, well, hopefully it's bad enough that the massive lawsuits start up here and continue until the next election.
Down with the ESA kill E3 (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Entertainment Software Association of Canada also wants an expansion of the enabler provision along with further tightening of the already-restrictive digital lock rules.
That doesn't sound like giving up.
Canada (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but the leaked diplomatic cables and various actions like putting Canada on the pirates list make it pretty clear that the US government (i.e. the US - you guys are responsible for who you vote into power) is actively pushing this stuff on the rest of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
(i.e. the US - you guys are responsible for who you vote into power)
You really think that's how it works these days? It's as clear cut as that? Because there are so many honest, everyday Joes on the ballot that aren't on the take or in some corporation's pocket, and we just choose not to elect them because we're dicks. We're simply dicks. Really, our elections boil down to which shit sandwich is going to taste the least appalling over the next 4 years, based on what is said before you take that bite. Once it's in your mouth, pretty much anything goes. The only real power we
Re:Canada (Score:4, Interesting)
You are responsible for the government you elect. That's what it means to live in a democracy. No, you're not all dicks. Unfortunately a large percentage of you are too apathetic to both voting (which is certainly not unique to the US), virtually all of you can't be bothered to run and actually commit to what you believe in, and the rest haven't bothered to think enough to figure out that abstaining from voting is completely stupid and everybody not voting for alternative candidates because "they don't have a chance" is nearly as dumb.
I'm Canadian. I didn't vote for Harper (and I DID vote), but as I Canadian I know he's our fault. We're getting what we asked for. And we'll pay for it. Next time hopefully we'll know better. If not, it's still our fault.
Vote your conscience. If everyone did that you guys would actually have a pretty decent democracy.
we need a tech star chamber (Score:5, Interesting)
The purpose of this consortium would be to buy up the media companies and put a bullet in their head .
It's time we stopped the tail from wagging the dog here. It's just good business.
Re:we need a tech star chamber (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They should see that mega upload was able to make a business out of paid subscribers even though identical DRM free content was available for free on competitors like piratebay and demonid. What are they so blind!
I'd pay for access to drm free books, movies and music, as soon as they come available, not drm restricted stuff whenever some distro company decides I'm allowed to get it in my region to protect deals with other dying media organisations.
What if every show that got canned managed to get piced up b
Re: (Score:2)
freedom
Re: (Score:2)
What do the six lattermost companies have to gain from this?
The ability to design products that do what the end-user wants instead of what the media companies demand.
Of course, if Sony is any indication, the evil from aquired media companies will spread through the entire organization like poison.
Re: (Score:2)
Actual article website (Score:5, Informative)
Can we link to Michael Geist's actual article rather than that horrid looking ActivePolitic website?
Original [michaelgeist.ca]
C-11 is NOTHING like SOPA, and milder then DMCA (Score:4, Interesting)
Please, C-11 does nothing of the sort.
C-11 is really just renaming some things in the original copyright acts, doesn't change the fact you must go to court to prove your case before having someone's website pulled, charged or anything.
It adds a bunch of non-specifics about the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT in the law), that we signed and never actually changed our copyrights to agree with. Its you know only been 10 years since the Liberals signed it and had not done anything about it Federally.
Also, most of the law, is worded to match that agreement, especially relating to internet sharing, however, the law was written not targeting the "service providers" and "users" as the agreement was originally signed and the American's adopted it as the DMCA, it actually appears to only target the people who are hosting/running the services. Which is following the spirit of the Supreme Court ruling about P2P file sharing being legal, as long as your not advertising, or benefiting through the copyright infringement financially.
Which seems to be why they added this part:
(2.4) In determining whether a person has infringed copyright under subsection (2.3), the court may consider
(a) whether the person expressly or implicitly marketed or promoted the service as one that could be used to enable acts of copyright infringement;
(b) whether the person had knowledge that the service was used to enable a significant number of acts of copyright infringement;
(c) whether the service has significant uses other than to enable acts of copyright infringement;
(d) the person’s ability, as part of providing the service, to limit acts of copyright infringement, and any action taken by the person to do so;
(e) any benefits the person received as a result of enabling the acts of copyright infringement; and
(f) the economic viability of the provision of the service if it were not used to enable acts of copyright infringement.
It is all about whether your providing a "service" to aid in copyright infridgement. Not actually the users. MegaUpload = No good, Torrents/Gnutella shared among peoples personal computers = okay still.
Re:C-11 is NOTHING like SOPA, and milder then DMCA (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
but simultaneously effectively revokes all of those exemptions if or whenever the work in question has any form of digital lock..
Breaking any type of "digital" lock on something, whether copyrighted or not, without the owners permission under Canadian law is illegal.
Adding it directly onto the copyright law changes nothing, other then well nothing. Considering the users of P2P sharing who are at the moment legal to do so, are not all parties to the lock breaking, only one person is, and regardless of the copyright law, they are still in violation of computer laws by bypassing any sort of digital lock. So at best (or worst depending o
Re:C-11 is NOTHING like SOPA, and milder then DMCA (Score:5, Informative)
Breaking any type of "digital" lock on something, whether copyrighted or not, without the owners permission under Canadian law is illegal.
Please cite the law as I will cite the a judgment CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 339, 2004 SCC 13 :
...
Under s. 29 of the Copyright Act, fair dealing for the purpose of research or private study does not infringe copyright. “Research” must be given a large and liberal interpretation in order to ensure that users’ rights are not unduly constrained, and is not limited to non-commercial or private contexts. Lawyers carrying on the business of law for profit are conducting research within the meaning of s. 29. The following factors help determine whether a dealing is fair: the purpose of the dealing, the character of the dealing, the amount of the dealing, the nature of the work, available alternatives to the dealing, and the effect of the dealing on the work. Here, the Law Society’s dealings with the publishers’ works through its custom photocopy service were research-based and fair. The access policy places appropriate limits on the type of copying that the Law Society will do. If a request does not appear to be for the purpose of research, criticism, review or private study, the copy will not be made. If a question arises as to whether the stated purpose is legitimate, the reference librarian will review the matter. The access policy limits the amount of work that will be copied, and the reference librarian reviews requests that exceed what might typically be considered reasonable and has the right to refuse to fulfill a request.
The Law Society did not authorize copyright infringement by providing selfservice photocopiers for use by its patrons in the Great Library. While authorization can be inferred from acts that are less than direct and positive, a person does not authorize infringement by authorizing the mere use of equipment that could be used to infringe copyright. Courts should presume that a person who authorizes an activity does so only so far as it is in accordance with the law. This presumption may be rebutted if it is shown that a certain relationship or degree of control existed between the alleged authorizer and the persons who committed the copyright infringement. Here, there was no evidence that the copiers had been used in a manner that was not consistent with copyright law. Moreover, the Law Society’s posting of a notice warning that it will not be responsible for any copies made in infringement of copyright does not constitute an express acknowledgement that the copiers will be used in an illegal manner. Finally, even if there were evidence of the copiers having been used to infringe copyright, the Law Society lacks sufficient control over the Great Library’s patrons to permit the conclusion that it sanctioned, approved or countenanced the infringement. ...
also there is another case in the lower court that used that judgment to allow personal backup so please cite the law you refer to
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent up.
GP is a liar and a shill.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice post but you completely missed the point of the article. The entertainment industry wants to *add* SOPA like provisions to C-11. You are correct that currently SOPA stuff isn't currently in there.
Re: (Score:2)
I am going to assume your American, cause our legal process is done differently.
Provisions being added are quite rare unless there is bickering amongst the parties, with things being removed, and others added as a compromise at times. With the current Conservative majority, there is no need to compromise, which means the law was tabled, and will be passed as is, since this is what the Conservative party is looking for. Additionally, lobbying like is done in the United States is illegal.
The Conservative part
Re: (Score:3)
These articles on C-11 are just fear mongering, without any real facts to back up the fear building its attempting to do. No thanks in part to people who don't know the Canadian political system, our laws, and people who are trying to find any excuse to blame the current Conservative government, when in reality, all of our international agreements for copyright laws and piracy were signed by the Liberal Party of Canada.
The Kyoto Protocol was also signed and ratified by the Liberals, yet the Conservatives had no problem dropping that as soon as they had a majority. WIPO hasn't even been ratified by Canada.
If the Conservatives thought it was a bad agreement, it's within their power to withdraw from it. That they haven't, and in fact tried pushing legislation through twice (and the Liberals' once), means they deserve all the scorn and blame being heaped on them over this.
Liar (Score:4, Interesting)
Please, C-11 does nothing of the sort.
C-11 is really just renaming some things in the original copyright acts
Shilling much?
Go read Section 41 [parl.gc.ca] then come back to apologize for your ludicrous statements.
C-11 criminalizes the circumvention of DRM for any purposes whatsoever, including bunt not limited to exercising your fair dealing rights. Want to rip the DVD that you bought in order to watch it on your iPhone? Congratulations, you are now a criminal for circumventing CSS.
Bloody liar.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This right here is the problem. They've worked their way so deep into culture as a "you must have this product" thing that they don't realise no one really wants it. We buy their crap because we have to, in order to remain current and fulfil social functions; take away the monetary barrier and no one will look back. No one cares about the artists. We're not consuming it for art. When we do get art that we like, fans go to extremes to celebrate it: Daft Punk, Starcraft, Firefly; whatever. Unsurprisingly, the
Dumbing down society! (Score:2)
And when every website is blocked.... (Score:2)
The internet will be so useful!
I mean, every website will be blocked, or will be too afraid of lawsuits to post anything other than a blank page, and even when they do post material, some submarine patent or copyright troll will sue or have them taken down.
Even this website, Slashdot will be taken down because it LINKS to a copyrighted news story. Google will be useless, because every website can be copyrighted, and you can't link to copyrighted material.
So, the web will be entirely destroyed. The whole pur
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, you realise there's this big scary yellow thing in the sky, right? I ain't goin out til somebody shoots it down.
And don't ask me to do it, they're making it illegal to own weapons down here.
Lets kill them (Score:2)
You know it would be much cheaper for us all to donate to a fund and have all of the lobbyists that work for the record companies snuffed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Although I am truly all for this idea, you are aiming low. Cut the friggin head off by going for Chris Dodd directly, although the lobbyists are scum, they are following orders. Take out the person giving the orders and you neutralize the lobbyists.
Of course whomever would be crazy enough to do this would spend the rest of their life in jail.
I only suggest this because the law not only has no effect on these people, they can buy any law they want. Since the law is ineffective society needs needs other me
Or better idea, since Google won't... (Score:2)
How about this as a better idea, since Google won't do it:
Why don't we all donate to a kickstarter and set up a nonprofit to purchase these companies and release their catalogs to the public domain? Buy 'em out and shut 'em up for good I say!
Re: (Score:2)
So your solution is to pay the people responsible?
Re: (Score:2)
There currently are no negative consequences for their actions which is why this behavior has continued, once there are consequences though you won't have to go though the trouble of killing their families.
Take out a couple high profile heads, such as Chris Dodd, and their replacements will think twice about what they are doing.
Don't be an idiot like that asshole who flew his plane into an IRS building in Austin. Killing minions will not only not change a thing, but will just piss off the general public ag
Do we all realize (Score:4, Insightful)
with out media companies there is no threat to the internet?
I somewhat hope they succeed.... (Score:2)
Why? Simple. The backlash will force the law to be repealed, and it will forever be scarred into the memory of everybody on the planet, preventing other SOPA-like laws from being passed.
Eh? (Score:5, Informative)
Wait, I though Canada had a levy on all CDs [wikipedia.org] and magnetic media (Flash as well?) so that the recording industry could get compensation for piracy?
They get compensation, and the power to block or take down sites? That seems like a bit too much of a handout to a particular industry for my tastes.
Re: (Score:3)
You misunderstand. The purpose of the levy is to compensate for private use copying, not piracy.
It is simply a matter of (entirely unsurprising) coincidence that people who pirate exploit these "private use" copying privileges to make themselves a copy, and then disregard the notion of "private", sharing the copies freely.
The fact that it's effectively unworkable to actually catch most of these people breaking the law does not mean that it is not actually against the law, any more than the fact that
Re: (Score:2)
Levy on CD-Rs, yes. On DVD-Rs, no. There was a levy on storage media including mp3 players, but that was revoked several years ago and AFAIK hasn't been reintroduced.
The recording industry in Canada long ago realized they messed up when they argued for, and won, the CD levy in the 90s. They totally missed the internet train, and DVDs. But instead of being at least somewhat reasonable about this new law, they want do double-dip by locking down media, locking up "pirates", and *still* continue collecting levi
I really hope it does...... (Score:2)
And then we would see a giant, titan monolithic enterprise, backed probably by all other giants (considering they could be next )
and start to fend off any attempts by stupid politicians to put their nose in technologies they do not understand.
If we have a big fighting company stand ground against these old farts, they might get the notion, change the mentality and not the technology...
There are so many other options that they could easily adopt, that would make piracy fade away.....
but they would have to un
Only problem is (Score:3, Interesting)
Canadians are passive and will allow this to roll through largely uncontested, just like all the tariffs that are STILL slapped on anything that can play music in spite of the fact that most devices these days have online music stores built into them meaning the tariff is largely charged against people who are legitimately using these devices to buy music.
The fact is Canadians should rise up against the CRTC which largely allows the Big 3 Canadian telco's to charge whatever the f*ck they want for their [insert sh*ty] services without any consumer protection and then these telcos make it difficult for any "competitive" re-sellers to operate. CRTC is limiting what services like Netflix can bring into Canada. CRTC is allowing such bullshit as SOPA like FUD into Canada. CRTC is ensuring price fixing and regular gouging of customers through mandatory fee increases.
If there is any organization that is less in touch with the 21st century telecommunications is an organization that was set up for radio and television transmissions. If there is any organization less committed to protecting consumer rights, its the good ol' Canadian Radio and Television Commission.
Re: (Score:2)
Canadians are passive and will allow this to roll through largely uncontested...
Canadians have already fought off 2 or 3 attempts at passing crappy copyright legislation so maybe they aren't so "passive". C-11 is just the latest incarnation. The problem this time around is that the current government has a marjority in parliment so they can pretty much do whatever they want. Although you may be right about the CRTC, it has nothing to do with this...
I've already started my protest (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who told the music industry about the great firewall of China. It's quite obvious where they are getting their recent ideas.
Ideas borrowed from China?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is not how Socialist (look up the word, it has a different meaning outside of the US) Canada is or has been in the past - its how incredibly Right Wing our current Conservative government is. Yes, somehow my fellow Canadian citizens were STUPID enough to elect the worst politician this country has ever seen into a majority government. I don't expect that is going to get any better until (sadly) a lot of the older generation dies off (as people get older they tend to be more conservative and we h
Re:Canada = another Commonwealth nanny state (Score:4, Interesting)
Harper's actually a brilliant politician. If you look at him carefully, he says what people want to hear, then dismisses what they don't by couching it terms they want to hear. At the same time, he discredits his opposition using brilliant words that people want to hear. Everything else he buries.
Think about it. Right now, we have the whole pipeline thing in BC. Harper has couched it in "JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS" and "EVIL AMERICAN ECOTERRORISTS". And that's all he's saying, ignoring that the oil companies he's backing are majority owned by international interests. So the big story is how all the eco groups are foreign funded.
It's also how his attack ads work - making us fearful of the party leaders.
Quite brilliant because the people lap it up.
Final example - cutting of corporate tax to BELOW the US (!). The funny thing about that is all the US companies are effectively subsidized because they have to pay at least the US tax rate, so low Canadian tax rates mean that the US goverment is getting revenue from the companies that weren't paying anything before. So the Canadian taxpayer is helping the US. (Nevermind the whole John Deere (?) thing where he handed them a bailout, and they promptly shut down the factory to relocate to the US). Again, all couched in "JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS"
Brilliant policitian. Just not someone who governs well.