Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Music Government Media Politics Entertainment Your Rights Online

Canadian Politicians Demand DMCA 195

Posted by kdawson
from the couldn't-blame-canada-then dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist is reporting that a Canadian parliamentary committee has demanded that the government establish a Canadian DMCA. The demand, which comes in a study on counterfeiting and piracy (PDF) released on Wednesday night, recommends ratification of the WIPO Internet treaties, increasing damage awards for copyright infringement, creating new offenses for selling modification devices, and encouraging prosecutors to seek jail time for piracy violations."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canadian Politicians Demand DMCA

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:02PM (#19596775)
    Canadian Politicians Demand DMCA?

    I demand new Canadian politicians.

    - Canadian Voter

    • by Synchis (191050) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:54PM (#19597515) Homepage Journal
      As a Canadian voter myself, I second that!

      A Canadian version of the DMCA, simply put, will do absolutely NOTHING.

      If people are copying software, music and movies now, what makes anybody think that increasing fines, or putting stiffer punishments is going to deter people from doing it in the future?

      The plain and simple fact of the matter is just this: Most people who download music, or copy DVD's don't realize that its illegal, or if they do know that its illegal, they simply don't care.

      Creating a duplicate law in Canada to mirror the already proven ineffective DMCA in the US is just one step closer to having a more American nation. There are ways to deal with the copying of DVD's or the downloading of music. This is not a good way to deal with it.

      Also, for those who didn't RTFA, this "demand" is based on data collected from a study done almost 10 years ago, and even the conductors of the study claimed that the numbers were at best, sketchy. It seems to me that its just more pressure from American corporations to get their laws pushed onto Canadians as well.

      Lets see a real study into this... with real numbers. I bet we'll find that:

      A: The movie industry is doing just fine! (Spiderman 3 set all time records... I think that says it all.)

      B: The piracy problem isn't as bad as they make it out to be. (While they calculate lost profits based on a per file transfer basis, they fail to remove those people that likely wouldn't have bought the movie anyways.)
      • by JohnnyGTO (102952)
        non-resident Canadians vote? If so how?
      • by TubeSteak (669689) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @02:22PM (#19597955) Journal

        A Canadian version of the DMCA, simply put, will do absolutely NOTHING.
        ...
        Creating a duplicate law in Canada to mirror the already proven ineffective DMCA in the US is just one step closer to having a more American nation.
        Allow me to be the first to point out the contradiction between those two statements.

        It seems to me that its just more pressure from American corporations to get their laws pushed onto Canadians as well.
        Ahh, now you're getting it. The, as you call it, "more American nation", will bring with it more American business to Canada. That is why countries join these various trade organizations and ratify treaties.

        I'm not saying I think it's good (because I don't) but there are valid reasons for bringing such laws to Canada... unfortunately those reasons have very little to do with benefiting the consumer.
      • "B: The piracy problem isn't as bad as they make it out to be. (While they calculate lost profits based on a per file transfer basis, they fail to remove those people that likely wouldn't have bought the movie anyways.)"

        On the one hand, I agree that *some* piracy isn't as bad for the industry as it's made out to be (versus completely unchecked piracy, which would be very bad indeed), I don't see how you couldn't calculate lost sales on a per-file transfer basis. The argument is "they wouldn't have bought t
  • by CheeseburgerBrown (553703) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:07PM (#19596841) Homepage Journal
    Since users of "Canadian" ISPs [rogers.com] are sent warning letters about their uploading behaviour citing the American DMCA already, what would be the point of having a domestic version? Just so it could be bilingual?

    • by Elemenope (905108)

      The Quebecois are fierce; if there isn't a French-also version I imagine they would just burn the warning letters en masse. If there is to be oppression in Quebec at all, it damn well will be in French.

    • by Minwee (522556)
      The Canadian version would say 'Please' more often.
    • by grumpyman (849537)
      It'll be bilingual and noted the phrase "except Quebec".
  • Pardon me... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Elemenope (905108) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:07PM (#19596847)

    But who exactly demanded the DMCA-like policies? Politicians pretty much everywhere are ciphers for constituent and special interests, and so it is unusual in the extreme for a legislative idea to come tumbling unbidden from legislators' heads. So, I'm wondering whose doing the demanding such that the legislators are responding.

  • by Spazntwich (208070) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:08PM (#19596853)
    that pirates represent such a huge threat to society we should spend tax dollars jailing them.

    Give me a fucking break. Can we not come up with a better punishment than jail for non-violent "criminals?"
    • Um, we do, its called "fines". Where they charge you a crapton of money and ruin your life just as completely.
    • by rtb61 (674572)
      I think jail time is highly appropriate. Just think of the benefit to politcal reform after a few thousand primary school children have been sent to jail for copying a friends CD or DVD.
  • by amigabill (146897) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:11PM (#19596893)
    What do the Canadian citizens demand?
  • by MillionthMonkey (240664) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:11PM (#19596907)
    Soon you'll have to register as a copyright infringer for life and people will see your house on copyright infringement Google Maps overlays so they can know to keep their little ones and zeros safe from you.
    • and people will see your house on copyright infringement Google Maps overlays


      Yeah, just look for the "skull-and-crossbones" flags ... Yarrr!
    • Hey, I already patented the list of known copyright infringer's. If you hear of something let me know so they don't infringe on my IP. There will be a reward of 3% of 5% of any money I can collect after expenses and lawyer fees. I would give you the entire 5% but 2% has to goto the patent for awarding rewards electronically.

      BTW, Can I copyright the statement you just wrote? I need it to show how the patent infringement is just as serious as copyright infringement. You should have your life ruined for that t
  • by Mr.Fork (633378) <edward@j@reddy.gmail@com> on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:15PM (#19596969) Journal
    Ok, I'm a canuck but our current conservative idiots are forgetting one very important piece of legislation that helps protects the privacy of their citizens. PIPEDA protects the privacy of its citizens ~ ISP's can not divulge personally identifying information, especially to the government. so I decide to download 30 movies, there is little they can do about it. What irritates me is that this kind of 1960's thinking is what got RIAA and the Movie Industry into its current mess. Fight the technology, not embrace it. I hope the law gets thrown out like the last one did.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The Parliamentary Committee responsible for the recommendation is the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology (INDU). http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/CommitteeList.aspx?Lan g=1&PARLSES=391&JNT=0&SELID=e18_&COM=10476 [parl.gc.ca] It is a multi-party committee comprised of Conservative, Liberal, and Bloc members. The Chair is a Conservative, and the two Vice-Chairs are Liberal and Bloc respectively.

      So all parties are culpable, not just the Conservatives.
      • Just like in the US.

        There is liberal, conservative, hard left, hard right and then there are the corporate issues that they all vote on as a block because they have been bought and paid with lobbiest money and they don't give a damn about what is good for the citizens any more.

        You can't even find a good person to vote for any more-- the way the game is structured, unless you have 10 million of corporate bri.. donations, the voters never hear your name and worse, the media (leftist sure- but pro-corporate e
        • by why-is-it (318134)

          the media (leftist sure- but pro-corporate even more)

          Huh?

          Am I the only one who sees a contradiction in that statement? How can the media be left-wing and pro-corporate at the same time? Could you elaborate a little?

          Since corporations tend to favour the neo-con right wing agenda, I would expect the media outlets (which are owned by large corporations) would favour the right-wing agenda. The CBC is a notable exception, as it is state owned of course.

          • Sure

            Left and right are outdated and weak philosophies who think they control the debate and struggle for power while it is now in reality controlled by large multi-national corporations and warlords.

            Except for a few fringe types like libertarians and ralph nader, we do not even get to vote on congressmen and senators (and presidential candidates) who are not controlled by corporate interests. Even our state representatives often pass sweetheart deals for corporations that include them paying no taxes and b
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by McGiraf (196030)
        no NPD ...
        • So the NDP isn't on the committee? That's surprising, since they've typically been the party that has been the most outspoken about strengthening copyright law in favour of industry.

          Ironically, the conservatives used to be the only party that opposed the strengthening of copyright law. I guess they ditched that platform, just like the few other policies they had that weren't completely awful.

    • by c6gunner (950153)
      "our current conservative idiots"?

      Well, a certain liberal idiot may wish to check the members list for the group which generated these suggestions. You may notice that the number of conservatives and liberals is equal, while also including several members of the Bloc Québécois, the NDP, and even an independent.

      But where would be the fun in that, right? Knee-jerk generalizations are just SO much more fun!
  • by Irvu (248207) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:16PM (#19596985)
    How can a politician who is by definition a servant of the public demand that a law be crafted according to their interests. In a democracy their job is to serve the interests of the public not the other way around, at least on paper. Or is Canada no longer a democracy?
    • by roman_mir (125474)
      Or is Canada no longer a democracy? - when was it a democracy?
    • by Abcd1234 (188840)
      Well, to be fair, content creators are also part of the public, and it's important to have their views represented. Of course, their views shouldn't be *disproportionately* represented...
    • Politicians live in a different world my friend and the lobbyists do everything that they can to maintain the illusion for them. Perhaps there is some vague notion of service to the public remaining in the back of their collective heads, but for most of them the reality of living a normal life and working a typical job is so far removed from their everyday experience that the parliament building might as well be located somewhere in the Twilight Zone.
    • by Quietti (257725)

      Or is Canada no longer a democracy?

      Mark my words: there is no single democratic country left on this planet. Except Switzerland and even then I have my doubts about this one.

      The titles have changed from Count, Duke, Earl, King, Sheik, etc. to Fortune-500 CEO, Prime Minister or President but, let's not fool ourselves: exactly when did the rulers ever represent their constituents? Never. That's when. There might have been episodes when the people felt enpowered, but that was just for show.

      Face it: democ

  • This is ridiculous. The PC Party seems incapable of coming up with it's own ideas. All they can do is look towards the US and emulate their behaviour trying to privatize health care and adding draconian copyright legislation.

    Apparently it's not enough that we're assumed guilty and pay a levy on blank media in order to cover copyright infringement, next it will be to take away fair use.

    Now, don't get me wrong.. If the money actually went to the artists I'd have no problem with it, but recording compa
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by tomstdenis (446163)
      The levy was added during liberal time. It's nice how people forget that. Oh the big bad PC crowd they caused the 12 YEARS OF STUPIDITY that the liberals caused.

      Not that I care much for the PC either. I despite most politicians. Though I'd still rank PC above liberals, liberals above NDP, and the bloc can blow me.
      • Meh, Politicians are politicians. No matter who gets voted into power, the people are miserable and demand change. I'd still rather pay the levy than get charged with copyright infringement.
      • The levy is precisely what kept Hollywood off our backs for the past 12 years(they still pressed a bit, mind you, but nothing special. They knew the Liberals weren't going to cave in any further). Nobody should be complaining about it lest they reveal their complete lack of knowledge on this topic. The current government being Conservative is the sole reason behind this sudden push for draconian copyright legislation.
        • by dadragon (177695)
          They were pushing under Martin, too.
          • Shhh, don't you recall, life was perfect under the Liberals guidance [*]. I love how easy it is for Dion to get up there and badmouth the PC for problems that the liberals either started or equally failed to resolve.

            [*] Again, not claiming the PC are perfect. Just saying life wasn't perfect during their period either. And frankly, I hate how they MUST disagree on everything. It's so juvenile and a huge waste of time. We should just forgo paying MPs between resolved acts. That way they only get paid fo
            • Shhh, don't you recall, life was perfect under the Liberals guidance

              I think you meant to say the NDP.

              That's ok, I changed it for you.

              At least it wasn't a BQ idea.
    • by Tridus (79566)
      These are the same people who watched how effective the US No-Fly List is, and decided that we needed our own to keep pesky libera... I mean terrorists off planes.

      I do have one beef with your post - this isn't the PC party. The PC party is dead, killed by one of Peter Mackay's many lies. This is the CPC, although as far as I can tell they're basically the Liberals who wear blue instead of red.
  • One tables reports before the summer break so the people adversely affected will forget about them by fall. A common trick by weak or minority governments to try to defuse controversies that would threaten them in the very next question period (;-)) --dave
  • by WillAffleckUW (858324) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:25PM (#19597099) Homepage Journal
    on file in Ottawa, I think this is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

    The DCMA won't help Canadians, only multi-nationals that suck the lifeblood of Canadian writers, artists, game designers, and musicians dry.

    But, hey, what do I know, I've only flown across Canada for literary and game conventions on Canada Council grants ...

    In Summary: Bad Idea. Very Bad.
  • by moderatorrater (1095745) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:27PM (#19597121)
    First off, I'm sorry for all you Canadians whose politics are getting fucked up by stupid companies.

    Second, it made some small amount of sense when the DMCA was put in place in the US because it hadn't been tried before. There were no examples of the DMCA in another large, first world country failing spectacularly. I still think that Orrin Hatch is an idiot at best, but at least they had some justification for it.

    But these politicians have no such defense. The DMCA was a failure by anyones metric, online piracy is out of control and pirated materials are sold without much problem. How could anyone in their right mind think that more of the same will help anything? How could anyone think that this is in Canada's best interest? This makes no sense.

    p.s. This isn't meant to say anything about canada in general or to endorse piracy.
  • Must be a lot more popular than I thought! Continued theft of his work by legions of adoring but thrifty fans is depriving this important artist of his livelihood. Obviously, Ottawa has to get involved at once.
  • Actually, this isn't too bad, although I'm not familiar with the WIPO part. It clearly says "distributing pirate or counterfeit works" If I buy Iron Maiden's "A Matter of Life and Death", it's not piracy. If I copy it to the hard drive, it's not piracy. If I share it, it's not a pirate work until the downloader receives it. - There's nothing in there about this situation. It's certainly not counterfeit as I'm not asserting anything about it. So it seems that I can only get in trouble if I were to downloa
  • Just trying to set the debate straight here. If it is wrong, and if the current countermeasures aren't sufficiently deterrent, than stricter measures must be introduced.

    Is it wrong to copy somebody else's work despite the owner's objections? Stick to this point...



    • Just trying to set the debate straight here. If it is wrong, and if the current countermeasures aren't sufficiently deterrent, than stricter measures must be introduced.

      Is it wrong to copy somebody else's work despite the owner's objections? Stick to this point...


      The point, which you have missed, is not about copying and whether it is right or wrong. The point is - how does Canada benefit from a law designed to protect American business interests?
      • by mi (197448)

        The point, which you have missed, is not about copying and whether it is right or wrong. The point is - how does Canada benefit from a law designed to protect American business interests?

        That's irrelevant — you are changing the subject, teacher of the people.

        If A is illegal, but people continue to engage in A, than either the anti-A laws/procedures ought to become stricter, or it should stop being illegal.

        Which of the two options to take is the question, and the answer depends, primarily, on

        • If A is illegal, but people continue to engage in A, than either the anti-A laws/procedures ought to become stricter, or it should stop being illegal. ...

          This logic is equally true, whether A is murder, marijuana smoking, speeding, or, indeed, copying/sharing somebody else's works.

          By this logic, the punishment for "jaywalking" (to which I feel "infringement without gain" is roughly equivalent) would be eventually raised to beheading.

          We had a system like this. It's was originally called the "Hammurabi code." As recently as a few centuries ago, there were gallows rows. It's a backwards justice system we abandoned decades ago.

          We no longer have a binary "right/wrong" switch in our system any more, because it doesn't make sense, for example, for starvation (and an accompanying bread thef

  • Canadian Politicians get funds from RIAA
  • Do you see how many members are in that committee? It amazes me that anything gets accomplished with this many people on it.

    If you live in a country run by committee, be on the committee.
  • by Weaselmancer (533834) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:49PM (#19597443)

    Just as parliamentarians voted to break for the summer, the Industry Committee issued its report on counterfeiting and piracy, unambiguously titled Counterfeiting and Piracy are Theft.

    Ok, two things.

    First off, "Industry Committee". A group that, by it's name alone admits that it does not represent the people. It represents business interests.

    Secondly, "Counterfeiting and Piracy are Theft". No, they're not. Otherwise you wouldn't need laws against counterfeiting and copyright violation, now would you? Theft was already on the books as a bad thing.

    What they are trying to do is to make things that aren't theft equal to theft to support their agenda. Which represents no person - only business interests.

  • by debest (471937) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @01:57PM (#19597569)
    As a Canadian whose been watching this since the late 90's, frankly I thought that we'd have reached this stage earlier. The media companies have been pushing the government non-stop: obviously, they are finding that Bev Oda and her Tory friends are more receptive to their message than Shiela Copps was in the Liberal days.

    As the Americans have discovered, it is difficult to get rid of crappy laws. The lobbyists know this: they just have to have patience and find the right stooges in power to do their bidding, then they're set.
  • I'm Canadian and I don't want a DMCA, nobody I know does. Fuck you politicians for not doing what we want.
  • and to get 'em, they have to take the DMCA.
  • I wrote to him concerning DMCA and copyright issues and he replied. He sounded very pro-DMCA and pro restrictive copyright despite the very careful wording. It is really odd because he's a Conservative (Liberals are media darlings, just like Democrats in the US). I won't be voting for him come next election which isn't too far off, that's for sure.
  • by JFMulder (59706) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @03:50PM (#19599153)
    The article says

    # create a new offence for the manufacture or distribution of circumvention devices for commercial gain
    Nowhere does it say I can't hack something for personnal usage.

    # create a new criminal offence for manufacturing, reproducing, importing, distributing, and selling counterfeit goods
    So if I keep it to myself, I'm not illegal.

    From what I understand, the DMCA doesn't even allow those two things.
  • by sabernet (751826) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @05:59PM (#19601097) Homepage
    #1: Parliament voted and dissolved for the summer.

    #2: Bare Naked Ladies(the band, take your mind outta the gutter). They and the Nettwerk music label oppose these kinds of actions. They also have money and the public ear. As far as a music label goes, Nettwerk is the one without the goaty. Combined with Michael Geist and we have the Canadian version of the Justice League.

    #3: We still, thankfully, have a privacy commissioner. So enforcement of this would be a little bunk.

    #4: Minority Gov't. Though the Bloc(the balance tipping power that solely is interested within their own province of Quebec is being more then their usual asshole selves towards the rest of the nation, there's no way, as a party, they would let this happen. Neither would the NDP. And the Liberals would smell the blood from miles away. Yes, I know the committee has peoples from all parties, but it doesn't mean the party itself would act on their behalf.

    I could be wrong(though I really hope I'm not), but I don't see this swimming.

  • by c6gunner (950153) on Thursday June 21, 2007 @06:07PM (#19601185)
    Check out this article [www.cbc.ca] while you're at it. Seems Ontario's Attorney General thinks it's ok that "cars adapted for street racing can be seized and destroyed, even if charges haven't been laid and a race has not taken place". In other words, screw the legal system, if the cops think your car may be used for street racing at somer point, they can impound it and destroy it and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

    See, these events are the ultimate result of creating a nanny-state. Eventually the government will want to take away ALL your rights, while insisting it's doing it to "protect you". People insist that the US is a police state, while I as a Canadian can be arrested for unpopular speech, have severe limitations on the ownership of weapons, don't have the right to protect my property with physical force of ANY kind, including open-hand control, and now can have my private property destroyed by the government just because I'm suspected of maybe intending to commit a crime. Face it, we lost our rights a long time ago. Those of you protesting against this DMCA act are trying to close the barn doors after all the animals have run off, and the rest of the barn burned to the ground.
  • Just today I discovered someone was plagarizing some of my copyrighted material. Had the person asked permission, I probably would have given the go ahead so long as he included proper credits and a link. Since he just took it upon himself to duplicate my work and claim credit, fuck him. I want to send a DMCA style take down notice.
  • Of course, in Canada it'll be called the DMC, eh?

The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up.

Working...