Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Canada Your Rights Online Politics

The IIPA Copyright Demands For Canada and Spain 113

Dangerous_Minds writes "The International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) is demanding a number of countries be placed back on the special 301 piracy watchlist. One country being recommended for inclusion is Canada (PDF). Apparently, even though Canada passed copyright reform laws, any compromise to protect consumers is reason for inclusion. Michael Geist offers some analysis on this move. Meanwhile, the IIPA is also recommending that Spain be included in the watchlist. In a separate filing, the IIPA makes a host of reasons why Spain should also be included. One of the main reasons seems to be that even though Spain passed the Sinde Law in spite of protests, the courts aren't simply rubberstamping any takedown requests and that cases that were dismissed due to lack of evidence is cause for concern. Freezenet offers some in-depth analysis on this development while noting towards the end that the Special 301 report suffers from credibility problems."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The IIPA Copyright Demands For Canada and Spain

Comments Filter:
  • Michael Geist (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 16, 2013 @04:49PM (#42923565)

    Is this Michael Geist guy the only person between the Intellectual Property goups and the people of Canada?

    It seams that if he was out of the picture there wouln't be anyone else in canada who gives a shit.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 16, 2013 @04:56PM (#42923617)

    Terrorism: the use of violence and intimidation to achieve political goals.
    Lobby your congressman to get IRAA, MPAA, IIPA classified as terrorists.

  • Re:IIPA (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fredgiblet ( 1063752 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @04:59PM (#42923639)
    Silly. It's by the coporations of the corporations for the corporations. You need to the get the new revision of the handbook.
  • IIPA's newspeak (Score:5, Insightful)

    by K. S. Kyosuke ( 729550 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @05:06PM (#42923671)

    Statements issued by the Attorney General in 2006 de-criminalizing infringing distributions of content by P2P networks continued to have ramifications in 2012, having led to a halt in criminal enforcement actions against illegal file sharing. Circular 1/2006 from Spain’s Office of the Prosecutor-General (Attorney General) argues that unauthorized uploading of copyright protected materials over the Internet, including via P2P systems, is not subject to criminal action under Article 270 of the Criminal Code unless such acts are “for commercial profit”, and that unauthorized downloading must be considered an act of private copying.

    So, judging from this, for IIPA, "illegal file sharing" does not actually mean "things that are outlawed and prosecuted in respective countries", it simply means "things we don't want other people to do".

  • by future assassin ( 639396 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @05:31PM (#42923799) Homepage

    By those numbers the amount of piracy in the US should be higher by quite a bit. Hell California has 38,041,430 people. 4 million more than Canada.

    Who the fuck are these retards kidding and why the fuck do they get to go around slandering other countries when their backyard is dirty as hell. The countries on the 301 list should do a proper study and create an nice official site stating the piracy rate in the US vs them.

  • Re:IIPA (Score:5, Insightful)

    by diegocg ( 1680514 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @05:40PM (#42923849)

    Is no government in the world sovereign, for the people, by the people, of the people it represents?

    In theory yes, Spain is sovereign. But so is America. If Spain decides that pirating is OK, i guess that Americans can restrict/boycott Spanish IP commercialization.

    In the real world, issues like IP protection need worldwide collaboration. Everybody wants their own IP protected, and in order to get that they need to protect the IP of other nations. It's necessary to find a balance, and if every nation listened only to their own citizens, they would never find one.

  • by houghi ( 78078 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @05:44PM (#42923869)

    Sure you can TRY to follow a business plan by doing it that way. However if that business plan fails, do not blame the people, blame your business plan.

    After I'm dead the family can decide what to do with it all.

    So they should be able to get some rights and turn that into money, just because you are a dead relative? What have THEY done?
    First you say it is about the individual copyright holder if he is maker of whatever the copyright is on and now suddenly somebody who has NO part in the process of the making and might not even have been born at that time is suddenly allowed to have a say in the matter.
    Still you think THAT is ok, but a company is evil? I see no difference in what you are saying and what the 'evil companies' are saying.

    You have chosen your side. Unfortunately you can not have the cookie and eat it too.

  • Canada eh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kawabago ( 551139 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @05:52PM (#42923933)
    Well we're putting the IIPA on our watch list of robber baron copyright trolls! It's time to take our culture back from greedy entertainment conglomerates! It's our culture and we should be able to use it any way we want to once a song has fallen down the charts, maybe a year after release. How do you like them apples IIPA? Yes you can buy laws, but we can band together and have them changed to suit us.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 16, 2013 @06:08PM (#42924041)

    Having to post Anonymous so my employer doesn't get my login credentials:

    I'm sorry,'re a writer? If your post exemplifies your work I would not pay to read it and you couldn't pay me enough for me to crack the book open. Tip: The white space is just as important to clear conveyance of message as the text itself. It's the reason we have paragraphs.

    More to the point you are writing about: If you write an enjoyable story that I don't have to expend large amounts of energy on reading comprehension, and it's a story that fits into what I'd want to read in the first place, I have no issue with making sure the writer gets his due... Publishers on the other hand...they leave a very bad taste in my mouth.


  • by cheekyjohnson ( 1873388 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @06:29PM (#42924179)

    If it takes me six months to a year to write it why am I expected to work for free and the readers expect to be paid for their time?

    You're not expected to work for free. Produce the novels or don't; it's entirely your decision and your decision alone. The readers may expect to be paid for their time when someone asks them to complete a job, but that situation is simply not the same as someone deciding to produce a novel and people later deciding to copy it and distribute it without interacting with the one who wrote it at all.

    but how do the readers benefit when writers fear publishing their work?

    For that matter, how are you benefiting from all that unpublished work?

    but what's wrong with letting the market decide?

    Indeed, but what does that have to do with government-enforced monopolies like copyright? Almost nothing, in my opinion.

  • by Phrogman ( 80473 ) on Saturday February 16, 2013 @07:56PM (#42924667) Homepage

    Yes, our Conservative government under Harper is just looking for ways to justify draconian anti-privacy legislation. They are more than willing to do whatever the Copyright Goons (tm) ask them to do. Asking to be put on this list is just then seeking another false justification for restricting our rights, restricting or eliminating our privacy etc.
    Harper would really be quite happy as a dictator I think. He already rules his party with an iron hand, and the Conservatives have already ensured that scientists (who receive any funding from the government) doing research cannot talk about it with the media - or publish their results - without getting government approval, particularly if the research has anything to do with climate change.

Competence, like truth, beauty, and contact lenses, is in the eye of the beholder. -- Dr. Laurence J. Peter