PissedMan
@cgocable.net
| Canadian DMCA May be Established to Criminalize Copyrights
"Word on the street is that Canadian Industry Minister Jim Prentice is about to try to shove the Canadian version of the US's failed Digital Millennium Copyright Act through Parliament very soon, and very fast. He made plans to do this before, and the overwhelming public outcry caused him to shelve them, but now he figures we're all distracted and we'll let him get away with it (especially since he's made a couple of cosmetic changes to the bill that he'll use to show how much he really, really cares about us poor Canadians, rather than the US government and entertainment companies who are giving him marching orders).
The Tories promised that they wouldn't do any more treaty-law without public consultation, but Prentice stalwartly refuses to have any public consultation on his plans, despite outcry from industry (he's the Minister of Industry, remember?), artists' groups, library groups, educator groups and public interest groups. He just keeps on ploughing ahead with his half-baked plan to follow the US off the same stupid copyright cliff it leapt off of in 1988 when it passed the DMCA, a law that has done nothing to reduce infringement, but which has screwed up libraries, competition, education, and has led to lawsuits against tens of thousands of ordinary citizens.
So it looks like we're going to have to do it again: we're going to have to write to Prentice, rally at his office, phone him and let him know that we're still watching, still paying attention, and still demand that he listen to the public -- the way his party promised they would -- before he brings down this law.
If the exceptions are undermined by the Canadian DMCA provisions, why is Prentice throwing them in? The answer is pretty clear. Prentice hopes that the media coverage will focus on these new "modernizing" provisions that he will claim benefit consumers, rather than on the DMCA-style anti-circumvention provisions that will lock down consumer products, harm research and security, raise privacy concerns, and create a restrictive new legal environment.
With the bill seemingly only days away, now is the time to again tell Prentice and your local MP that Canadians will not be so easily deceived. Countries such as New Zealand and Israel have recently enacted legislation with far more balance than what Prentice has in mind. It only takes a few seconds to send an email to Prentice, the Prime Minister, and your local MP, letting them know that Canadians won't be deceived by a Canadian DMCA and that Canadian copyright reform should reflect fair copyright principles (and after you click send, print out the email and drop it in the mail without a stamp to House of Commons, Ottawa, ON, K1A0A6)."
So, help the cause Canadians. At the very least Digg it.
»digg.com/tech_news/Canadian_DMCA···pyrights |
|
anonnotreall
join:2008-05-16 | Was there an online petition last time? perhaps another one again. |
|
Cliffy03
Premium
join:2003-06-29
Kitchener, ON
clubs: | reply to PissedMan
I am still waiting to hear from the 2 emails I sent about the Bell fiasco. |
|
globus999
join:2008-05-15 | reply to PissedMan
It would seem is true. Check:
»www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2942/125/ |
|
jerrycan
join:2008-04-03
Kitchener, ON | reply to PissedMan
Anyone have a good form letter I can paste? |
|
Dillerd
@rogers.com
| Somthing like this, the Conservatives are trying to push through, could ruin the internet in Canada for good.
Never mind just the throttling and caps, which were implemented without the consumers consent.Now, with
a new copywrite bill that may mirror the US DMCA,
it may push Bell, Rogers and other customers from
other ISP's to totally drop the internet.
This crazy CDMCA goes through, who's going to pay $50 and
up for high speed that people can't use? Everybody knows
what high speed is used for..sharing large files of all
kinds. With too many copywrite restrictions imposed, HS
will become obsolete. Can we say "dial up" folks. 
I can tell you no one in their right mind would pay fifty bucks and up for dial up! I know I sure wouldn't. Everyone lived just fine before the internet came about. We can survive without it, even though some may think they can't.
We just find something else to do. |
|
BitemybagHaper
@host36-server.com
| reply to PissedMan
Well. Gee. My router is unsecured, so unless you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was my IP that downloaded the files. And unless Rogers and the rest turn over your IP (without a court order is not farking likely is it), this isn't going anywhere. Just Harper and his brown shirts trying to act like bigger dicks than they already are.
Fark you Harper. |
|
globus999
join:2008-05-15
| said by BitemybagHaper :
Well. Gee. My router is unsecured, so unless you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was my IP that downloaded the files. And unless Rogers and the rest turn over your IP (without a court order is not farking likely is it), this isn't going anywhere. Just Harper and his brown shirts trying to act like bigger dicks than they already are.
Fark you Harper.
Sorry to burst your day dreaming, but such a defense has already been tried in US and it FAILED misearably. Why do you think it would work here??? |
|
Dillerd
@rogers.com
| reply to BitemybagHaper
"Just Harper and his brown shirts trying to act like bigger dicks than they already are.
Fark you Harper."
Apparently, it's not just Harper and the Tories. It's also pressure from the USA to adopt tougher copywrite laws, even though their DMCA act was a miserable failure.
We're not in the US though. We have our own country.
It's said people all over the world are proud of our
copywrite laws, just the way they are currently.
Looks like Harper has his head up Bush's butt
again. 
Most people pay a good deal of money for HS internet! Give us a break!  |
|
Dillerd
@rogers.com
| reply to PissedMan
American politcians putting pressure on Canada to
adopt their copywrite laws? Well, they bully everyone
else. Why not us?
If this new CDMCA or whatever they call the bill goes through, It will be the US politicians (republicans) and
the Tories fault for giving in.
»www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2946/125/ |
|
Conservativesuck
@host36-server.com | reply to PissedMan
Harpers a dillhole. Anyone that supports these nazis has a hold in their heads. Or should have. |
|
growupabit
@bell.ca | reply to Dillerd
most people spend more on coffee at work each day then the internet. internet does not cost alot. if a buck something a day is alot for you to have the intrnet, your prolly better off with a library pass. |
|
jnmontario
join:2008-05-11
 ·Bell Sympatico
 ·Xplornet
| reply to PissedMan
Dear Honourable Minister,
In December, when your proposed copyright reform bill was introduced, there was strong consumer backlash and the bill was shelved for revamping. It is expected that you will introduce a slightly modified version of this bill again before session lets out in the next few weeks in order to satisfy pressure from industry representatives. Herein lie a few suggestions proposed, by amongst others, intellectual property lawyer Michael Geist:
1) Anti-circumvention provisions should be directly linked to copyright infringement. The anti-circumvention provisions have been by far the most controversial element of the proposed reforms. The experience in the United States, where anti-circumvention provisions effectively trump fair use rights, provides the paradigm example of what not do to. It should only be a violation of the law to circumvent a technological protection measure (TPM) if the underlying purpose is to infringe copyright. Circumvention should be permitted to access a work for fair dealing or private copying purposes. This approach - which is similar (though not identical) to the failed Bill C-60 - would allow Canada to implement the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Internet treaties and avoid some of the negative "unintended consequences" that have arisen under the U.S. law.
2) No ban on devices that can be used to circumvent a TPM. Canada should not ban devices that can be used to circumvent a TPM. The reason is obvious - if Canadians cannot access the tools necessary to exercise their user rights under the Copyright Act, those rights are effectively extinguished in the digital world. If organizations are permitted to use TPMs to lock down content in a manner that threatens fair dealing, Canadians should have the right to access and use technologies that restores the copyright balance.
3) Expand the fair dealing provision by establishing "flexible fair dealing." Led by the United States, several countries around the world have established fair use provisions within their copyright laws (Israel being the most recent). The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled that Canada's fair dealing provision must be interpreted in a broad and liberal manner. Yet the law currently includes a limited number of categories (research, private study, criticism, news reporting) that renders everyday activities such as recording television programs acts of infringement. The ideal remedy is to address other categories such as parody, time shifting, and format shifting by making the current list of fair dealing categories illustrative rather than exhaustive.
4) Establish a legal safe harbour for Internet intermediaries supported by a "notice and notice" takedown system. The creation of a legal safe harbour that protects Internet intermediaries from liability for the actions of their users is critically important to foster a robust and vibrant online world. Indeed, without such protections, intermediaries (which include Internet service providers, search engines, video sites, blog hosts, and individual bloggers) frequently remove legitimate content in the face of legal threats. Canadian law should include an explicit safe harbour that insulates intermediaries from liability where they follow a prescribed model that balances the interests of users and content owners. The ideal Canadian approach would be a "notice and notice" system that has been used successfully for many years on an informal basis.
5) Modernize the backup copy provision. As part of the 1988 copyright reform, Canadian copyright law was amended to allow for the making of backup copies of computer programs. In 1988, backing up digital data meant backing up software programs. Today, digital data includes CDs, DVDs, and video games. All of these products suffer from the same frailties as software programs, namely the ease with which hard drives become corrupted or CDs and DVDs scratched and non-functional. From a policy perspective, the issue is the same - ensuring that consumers have a simple way to protect their investment. "Modernizing" copyright law should include bringing this provision into the 21st century by expanding the right to make a backup copy to all digital consumer products.
6) Rationalize the statutory damages provision. Canada is one of the only countries in the world to have a statutory damages provision within its copyright legislation. It creates the prospect of massive liability - up to $20,000 per infringement - without any evidence of actual loss. This system may have been designed for commercial-scale infringement, but its primary use today is found in the U.S. where statutory damages led to the massive liability for one peer-to-peer file sharing defendant and leaves many defendants with little option but settlement. Before Canada faces similar developments, we should amend the statutory damages provision by clarifying that it only applies in cases of commercial gain.
7) Include actual distribution in the making available right. The new bill will likely include a "making available" provision that will grant copyright holders the exclusive right to make their works available. While there is reason to believe that Canadian law already features a making available right, any new provision should require actual distribution, which ensures that liability only flows from real harm.
In closing, I pray that when you find 'a balance between industry and consumer' that the balance is not in a bank account but rather keeping in mind the rights for fair-use of voting, tax-paying Canadians.
Sicerely,
blah blah |
|
Dillerd
@rogers.com
| reply to growupabit
I don't drink fifty bucks worth of coffee a month at Tim Horton's or Country Style. That's a lot of money down the drain monthly, especially for coffee! I could make a pot of coffee here at home for free. Of course, like everyone else, I do take the occasional trip to Timmy's or Country Style. 
If you want to pay fifty or more dollars monthly for something that would give you no better, mabe even worse a service than what dial
up would, that's your choice.
If a new copywrite bill means not only access to large files, but also gives Rogers and Bell the freedom to block our favourite sites among other restrictive measures, I think I'd rather go back to paying a low monthly fee for
dial-up or no internet at all.
That's just my 2 cents.  |
|
jerrycan
join:2008-04-03
Kitchener, ON
·Velcom
| reply to PissedMan
Response from my MP (seems thoughtful)...
Dear Mr. [Redacted],
Thank you for your email concerning the Conservative Government's plan to introduce a new copyright law. Due to public pressure, the legislation that was supposed to be tabled during the fall session has now been delayed.
The Conservatives promised almost two years ago to put forward a new copyright law and as long as the Bill has not been tabled everything the government might do is just speculation.
For now, I am waiting to see what will be proposed before taking a position on the new copyright legislation. I am keeping all the emails and letters that I receive on this issue in a separate folder and will review them once the Bill is tabled. Thank you once again for your thought-provoking email.
Sincerely,
Hon. Andrew Telegdi, P.C., M.P.
Kitchener-Waterloo |
|
Friendly Lurker
@rogers.com
| reply to PissedMan
I emailed Jim Prentice on the subject and got a response back from someone in his gov't office making this look like a normal "government" iniative and not a "Conservative" plan. It's a waste of effort.
If the recently leaked information on ACTA is true your ISP will have to release your private information to a complainant without a court order and without needing to prove that an infringement took place. Imagine that someone lets you download a piece of software or view a video on an open site and then they or a 3rd party, complains that your ip infringed on their copyright so they can get your name and home address to spam you. What a easy way to collect your private information all sanctionned by the new Conservative party of Canada and your ISP will say they had no choice so they are not responsible.
If this becomes law, Rogers will lose a long term internet, cellphone and digital cable customer. Why risk something so one sided.
Last time, I went "C" for the first time in my life but as the saying goes, fool me once......
If this is anything like what has been suggested in the newspapers, people won't forget that it's a "Prentice / Harper Conservative" sellout. Anyone remember Kim Campbell?
Hopefully it's all false rumour. This idea is so stupid I can't see a political party risking ruin for a second and maybe final time on something like this. |
|
Robrr
join:2008-04-19
Guelph, ON
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to PissedMan
This was reported in the Vancouver Sun the other day
»www.canada.com/vancouversun/stor···ce5e&p=1
We had better start making noise now to stop this dead in its tracks before its too late |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB | reply to PissedMan
I don't think i could go back to dialup, but there would definately be a decreased reason to buy your isp's enhanced packages. |
|
Dillerd
@rogers.com
| reply to PissedMan
If Stephen Harper and the conservative party give in, and sign this unfair ACTA or CDMCA, I'll most definately go
back to dial-up.That's unless they won't give you the freedom to e-mail anyone who isn't a subscriber to Rogers
or Bell Canada.
What good would HS be without the freedom to go to your favourite sites, without being blocked. Not having the freedom to download anything without having to worry
about going to prison.
A new copywrite bill without transparency, ACTA or an Americanised DMCA could be the death of the internet in
Canada. |
|
lolwut222
@teksavvy.com | reply to PissedMan
I thought copyright's were already criminal. |
|
