Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Government Politics Your Rights Online

Geist's Fair Copyright for Canada Principles 43

An anonymous reader writes "Canadian law prof Michael Geist has been leading the charge against a Canadian DMCA including the creation of a Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that now has more than 38,000 members. Having delayed the legislation, he now outlines what Canadians should be fighting for — more flexible fair dealing, a balanced implementation of the WIPO Internet treaties, an ISP safe harbor, and a modernized backup copy provision."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Geist's Fair Copyright for Canada Principles

Comments Filter:
  • it's german (Score:5, Funny)

    by User 956 ( 568564 ) on Friday January 18, 2008 @05:40PM (#22100970) Homepage
    Canadian law prof Michael Geist has been leading the charge against a Canadian DMCA including the creation of a Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that now has more than 38,000 members.

    With Mr. Geist leading the discussion, I'm sure it's very spirited. The RIAA doesn't have a ghost of a chance.
    • Re:it's german (Score:5, Informative)

      by Beardo the Bearded ( 321478 ) on Friday January 18, 2008 @06:41PM (#22101938)
      We do things differently in Canada.

      Instead of trying to tilt one way or the other, we try our best to come up with compromises that suit all legitimate parties and society as a whole. Instead of saying, "w3 sld 2 d/l L R mp3s n war3z!" the rational amongst us will come up with some points that we can all agree on. What this does is force the other side to compromise as well. If the CCRA won't budge, then we can realize that they're full of back bacon and they can leave parliament hill.

      We've always had an opposition party and called it Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. The idea is that you are supposed to be critical of your government - and that you never have your loyalty to the country (or the crown) questioned. This gives us a lot of options when the government messes up. If my local conservative MP doesn't want to listen, I can call Keith Martin's office and tell them all about it. They'll follow up. If the Industry Minister proposes crappy legislation, I can call the Industry Critics and send them a portfolio on the details.

      And yes, I got your ghost joke.
      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        We've always had an opposition party and called it Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. The idea is that you are supposed to be critical of your government - and that you never have your loyalty to the country (or the crown) questioned.

        That only works in a minority government as the opposition can in theory throw the government into an election. And the senate, well when was the last time they actually really stopped a government bill?

        Fortunately Canada has a minority government right now, for if not this wou

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          The reasons we're not that interested in what Mulroney did are:
          1. We all know that he's a corrupt asshole.
          2. We got tired of his shit after Meech Lake.
          3. If it's not "Hey, Chinboy's going to jail", we just don't care.

          Our politicians aren't noble, not by any stretch. I wouldn't go far enough to call them 5-year dictatorships. After all, they have to get re-elected, and we'll remember.
        • lol offshore Martin. That guy was bad news long before he ever read his first budget on the air. It takes one hell of a freak to just stand there emotion-less, while being accused of the greatest swindle our country has seen.
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by I_Voter ( 987579 )
        Beardo the Bearded wrote:

        We do things differently in Canada. Instead of trying to tilt one way or the other, we try our best to come up with compromises ..

        -------------

        IMO One of the reasons this is less common in the USA, at least in political discourse, is that we lack "real" political parties. Political parties used to be organizations that could field politicians that reflected the organizations interests, and would carry the organizations name on the ballot. By requiring, (in most states) pa

    • we have about 24 million internet accounts. Sept 2005 - 5.4 million were logged into p2p systems at same time March 2006 - 9.8 Million Thats last time they wanted it public but it is said round circles it could be as many as 2/3 using p2p. The internet levy proposed would raise about 5$ per internet account. 120million/month or about 1.44Billion now think about times 8 for the USA.... Then add Europe..... Asia.... So this really isn't about money after all else they'd push this. It is about control or DRM,
  • by Anonymous Coward
    that's like what, 32,000 Americans?

    38,000 frantic Canadians standing around saying "eh? take off ya DMCA hoser". Adorably cute. I could just kiss Canadians.
  • State sanctioned. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 18, 2008 @06:15PM (#22101502)
    I want the audiance to make note that he solves the copyright issues via society sanctioned means. Not by hiding behind a geo/content-hiding P2P client in the safety of one's basement. Talk about mass rebellion all you want, it's people like him who will do far more to make things balanced (as opposed to the lopsided solution piracy presents).
    • by OECD ( 639690 ) on Friday January 18, 2008 @06:52PM (#22102088) Journal

      Talk about mass rebellion all you want, it's people like him who will do far more to make things balanced (as opposed to the lopsided solution piracy presents).

      While I wish him well, he's really just trying to maintain/regain ground. Ultimately, the upcoming generation that refuses to engage in the ridiculous game of "pretend" that the distribution agencies insist we all play (as in, pretend these bits are really hard to copy) will do more. It'll just take a while.

      "Piracy" (sharing) isn't a "solution", it's just a description of reality. The sooner everyone accepts that, the better we'll all be.

  • by CodeMunch ( 95290 ) * on Friday January 18, 2008 @06:32PM (#22101796) Homepage
    First: Thank you Mr. Geist for being a vocal representative for us.

    Several months ago there was an amendment to our copyright legislation (bill C-59) that made the "camcording" a criminal act....mostly due to the "rampant piracy" [insert blame canada here] reported by us corporations.

    I couldn't find a date when that legislation was passed (introduced June 1, 2007 - does that mean passed as well?) but since then, only TWO people have been charged and the second was just a couple days ago.

    Thank you MPAA (and canadian derivatives) for wasting my fucking tax dollars to prop up your business model. It's doing a swell job catching all the bad camcords going to the U.S.

    Thank you Bev Oda and Maxime Bernier for representing foreign interests. traitors.

    The previous Michael Geist /. link: http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/12/1150200 [slashdot.org]

    • by RattFink ( 93631 ) on Friday January 18, 2008 @06:52PM (#22102096) Journal

      (introduced June 1, 2007 - does that mean passed as well?)

      The bill received Royal Assent on the 22nd of June making it law after that.
    • but since then, only TWO people have been charged and the second was just a couple days ago.
      Don't you see how well it has been deterring rampant piracy?

      This and the successful Bear Patrol show that the Conservative Government are able to produce real Made-In-Canada results. And this is a minority Government. Imagine how much more they'll be able to go to protect us if they had a majority Government!

      - RG>
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I don't usually disagree wrt new laws sucking, but in this case, it makes sense. Unless you are given explicit permission, it should not be legal to camcord a movie in a theatre. That it ever was legal was not good, and even if nobody were ever charged, clearing up idiosyncrasies like this is what law is for.

      Better they "waste" money making laws that make sense than laws that are inherently bad.
    • Thank you for saving me the effort. Good post.

      Traitors is a very good word for those two. Should be dealt with accordingly.
    • Several months ago there was an amendment to our copyright legislation (bill C-59) that made the "camcording" a criminal act....mostly due to the "rampant piracy" [insert blame canada here] reported by us corporations.
      I've had several discussions with my lawyer over supper about that, and his opinion is that it is a totally bullshit law, passed just so the whiny asshole south of the border would shut the fuck up, because one cannot make a criminal act an action that does not harm the public welfare.

      Camcording a movie is certainly not hurting the public welfare; it does infringe on intellectual property, but it cannot be defined as a crime, especially that the law specifically mentions that in order to be a crime, one has to camcord the movie ***WITHOUT*** the permission of the theater manager.

      Judges will take a very dim view of a law that lowers them to the level of a movie house manager...

  • by JonMartin ( 123209 ) on Friday January 18, 2008 @11:21PM (#22104728) Homepage
    A handful of us met with our MP this very afternoon (Laurie Hawn - Conservative for Edmonton Centre). We talked about our concerns and what happens next for about an hour.


    The bill will be introduced sometime in the next month or so. It is now considered, thanks to the efforts of everyone who called and wrote in December, a high profile bill.

    A bill goes through 3 readings in the House of Commons. After the third it is passed to the Senate. After the first and second reading the bill may be sent to committee for hearings and modification. Now here is where it gets tricky. After the second reading the committee cannot make major changes to the bill, so if the proposed copyright legislation is really broken (and by all indications it will be) it needs to go to committee after first reading where it can be completely overhauled if need be.

    But it is the discretion of the House leaders (each party) whether it goes to committee after the first reading.

    So you all need to write the Leader, House Leader, and Industry critic of the opposition parties to tell them this bill must go to committee after the first reading so we have an opportunity for hearings and major revisions. Send copies to Stephen Harper, Jim Prentice (Minister of Industry), Josée Verner (Heritage), Peter Van Loan (Government House Leader), James Rajotte (head of the Industry committee) and your local MP while you are at it.

    This might sound like a lot of work, but because of the minority government this is probably the best time for this legislation. Remember, committees are made up proportional to seats in the House, so the Government has to bargain with the opposition there too.

    • Let's not forget that this government is on it's last miles; opposition parties have made well known the fact that they are lusting for blood, and will topple the government at the first opportunity.
  • by Pig Hogger ( 10379 ) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (reggoh.gip)> on Saturday January 19, 2008 @01:37AM (#22105602) Journal
    The most pernicious effect of an eventual DMCA-like law would be on DVD regioning.

    By the terms of the DVD-CCA, properly-licensed DVD players **CANNOT** play DVDs from outside the region they are assigned. Of course, everyone has region-free DVD players, but it is absolutefuckingly sure that such players **WILL** be outlawed, as well as the DECSS software everyone loves and hates.

    However, such a law will bit parliament big-time in the arse: Canada is a country of immigrants, much more so than the US, as there is no "Canadian melting pot" as immigrants are encouraged to retain their cultures*. Now, you are going to tell indians that they are not allowed to watch movies from India? Tell the Chinese that they are not allowed to watch movies from China? Tell the French that they are not allowed to watch movies from France? Tell english that they are not allowed to watch British movies? but they should only watch what Hollywood decides they should watch?

    Like, yeah, this is going to go right well down with the plebe...

    Better yet, in our Constitution is a Charter of Rights [justice.gc.ca] which does not gives a shit about commercial interests trampling the individual freedom of, say, watching a movie of one's choice.

    * An old ploy to minorize the french by having immigrants consider them like yet another ethnic group (never mind that the french actually founded Canada as we know it almost half a millenium ago -- my ancestors were well established here when the pilgrims landed at Plymouth!).

  • Please do note that Unless you live in Canada where citizens are shielded from P2P copyright lawsuits, because the pay an extra fee on their CD, DVD purchases to do so, then downloading some P2P files may put you at risk for a civil lawsuit in any other country. These lawsuits usually take the form of class-action suits, filed against groups of users who are logged as blatantly copying and distributing copyrighted materials. Recently, the MPAA and RIAA, along with the governments of England and Australia,

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Working...