# Secret Copyright Deal May Affect Macs, iPods



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

*Copyright deal could change what Canadians can put on iPods, computers:*

“OTTAWA - The federal government is secretly negotiating an agreement to revamp international copyright laws which could make the information on Canadians' iPods, laptop computers or other personal electronic devices illegal and greatly increase the difficulty of travelling with such devices.

The deal could also impose strict regulations on Internet service providers, forcing those companies to hand over customer information without a court order.

Called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), the new plan would see Canada join other countries, including the United States and members of the European Union, to form an international coalition against copyright infringement.

The agreement is being structured much like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) except it will create rules and regulations regarding private copying and copyright laws.

Federal trade agreements do not require parliamentary approval. *The deal would create an international regulator that could turn border guards and other public security personnel into copyright police.* The security officials would be charged with checking laptops, iPods and even cellular phones for content that "infringes" on copyright laws, such as ripped CDs and movies.”

Copyright deal could change what Canadians can put on iPods, computers


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

This cannot be stated enough times:

Go find out who your MP is, and get this eMail and Snail Mail Address, Go to

Find your Member of Parliament using your Postal Code


and enter your Postal Code.







> I want to state, as your constituent, my opposition to any kind of anti-fair use legislation. Solutions to the problem of copyright infringement cannot come at the expense of the rights of those who have legally purchased music, movies television shows and other media.
> 
> I have just completed backing up all of my audio CDs to my computer so that I may protect a very valuable personal investment. This also allows me to listen to the CDs on my MP3 player when out of the house. I do not want to be considered a criminal for protecting what is mine, nor do I want to be considered a criminal for listening to music I have bought, just because I did not listen to it from a specific plastic disc.
> 
> ...


Online Rights Canada


----------



## eggman (Jun 24, 2006)

*Very distrubing.*

It may be time to write Mr. Prentice again, as well as my local MP.

The last time my local MP took the time to write back... although it was a form letter that responeded to none of the questions I asked him it was a "nice" gesture.

Mr. Prentice remained silent.

Additional info here (look under ACTA if it gets scrolled down the blog) many interesting links from Geist:

Michael Geist - Blog

The ever popular Wikileaks has some info here:

Proposed US plurilateral intellectual property trade agreement - Wikileaks

Other websites that are related:

IP Justice » Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

I had some significant training under OLD US copyright law (pre-DMCA) and crap like this just seems suffocating and pointless in the long run... it seems as though the very IP owners have forgotten where they and their product comes from.


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

This "crime" costs the Feds millions in sales taxes. That's why they are fighting so hard.

Besides, it's a soft target.

"Sorry, we're putting hard crime on hold, 'till we fix this problem."


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

SINC said:


> Federal trade agreements do not require parliamentary approval. *The deal would create an international regulator that could turn border guards and other public security personnel into copyright police.* The security officials would be charged with checking laptops, iPods and even cellular phones for content that "infringes" on copyright laws, such as ripped CDs and movies.


Man, our Parliamentarians are sure stupid. They think that copies of music are transported across borders like drugs and cigarettes are. Really, I do not think that anyone transports pirated music across the border on a laptop - they can just set up a Torrent or something and do it electronically.

It will end up being a big waste of time. Can you imagine if you had to wait at the border behind some dude with a Windoze laptop - and the border guard is trying to get the system to boot to see if there is piracted software? I can just see the lines - "sorry sir, I will have to reinstall M$ Windoze Vista Premium Optimum Ultimate Supernatural Service Pack XVI to see if you have a pirated MP3 file..."

King Harpo is going a good job at not getting any of the business at hand done. He's got his Minister in charge of shagging the Hell's Angels communal sex partner trying to stuff helicopters that we do not actually own yet into Russian aircraft... He's got Mr. Lunn in charge of creating a massive toxic hotspot at Chalk River... He's got the Environment dude doing everything he can to ruin the environment... And he has not addressed any of the real problems this nation has: land claims, crime and gang activities, official corruption and graft, the economy that is falling apart, and who knows how many other hundreds of issues of real importance. But sneaking MP3's through the border - well, that is worth a billion dollar program - that is, if a Canadian can get the appropriate travel Visas and permits to allow a day trip into Detroit...

Is it part of the secret initiation as Prime Minister that the person be entirely lobotomized by the governor-general???


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

If they were serious about this they would just prosecute the 10 or 12 businesses operating in legitimate malls along Highway 7 north of Toronto and stop them from selling the same copied videos burned to DVD with the box art. They could start with just the DVDs of films that haven't yet arrived in theatres.


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

They get sales tax on that stuff.

Next question, please.

Yes, the gentleman in the barrel.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

iJohnHenry said:


> They get sales tax on that stuff.
> 
> Next question, please.
> 
> Yes, the gentleman in the barrel.



I would have thought so at one point, but the fact that they take cash only, include all taxes in the price of the DVD and provide no receipts indicating the name of the business suggests to me otherwise.


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

Then let's get RevCan on their ass.

Hell, they even look the other way for hookers, *as long as they pay their taxes*.


----------



## titans88 (Oct 3, 2007)

Macfury said:


> If they were serious about this they would just prosecute the 10 or 12 businesses operating in legitimate malls along Highway 7 north of Toronto and stop them from selling the same copied videos burned to DVD with the box art. They could start with just the DVDs of films that haven't yet arrived in theatres.


EXACTLY!

I can walk through Chinatown here in Ottawa and get just about any film still in the theater for $5-$10. It may not be the best quality, but I can still get it.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Macfury said:


> If they were serious about this they would just prosecute the 10 or 12 businesses operating in legitimate malls along Highway 7 north of Toronto and stop them from selling the same copied videos burned to DVD with the box art. They could start with just the DVDs of films that haven't yet arrived in theatres.


And yet the Government worries about ThePirateBay...

Reminds me of the government agency in Ontario that a few years ago was ignoring pretty much all public complaints, and was concentrating their full resources upon an Adult Movie shop in Toronto. The owner of that business was quite irate that they Government had not only spent 1600 hours in the shop thorougly investigating the complaint - but that it was ruining his business because his regular clients were scared of the skeevy government men wearing trenchcoats and who were fondling all of the merchandise.

_Parliamentary IQ = The lowest IQ in the Parliament divided by the number of Parliamentarians..._


----------



## jeepguy (Apr 4, 2008)

Macfury said:


> If they were serious about this they would just prosecute the 10 or 12 businesses operating in legitimate malls along Highway 7 north of Toronto and stop them from selling the same copied videos burned to DVD with the box art. They could start with just the DVDs of films that haven't yet arrived in theatres.


They get busted about once a year, when I lived in Unionville we use to call them the Pirates of the Pacific Mall. As soon as they close one down another one opens in it's place.


----------



## Guest (May 26, 2008)

Wow .. what a serious invasion of our privacy ... it seems that they will have the "duty" or "right" to search our laptop computers for potentially infringing material. Does this mean I have to provide them my login credentials to do so? What happened to my right to privacy on this one I wonder ... up until now they couldn't do this legally unless they arrested you. This is like passing a bill that would allow police to enter your home and do a complete search to check for potentially infringing material.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

So is this yet another example of the Harper clan's promised transparency in government? 

They've already tried to implement something under the radar with their attempt at bringing a US-style Digital Millennium Copyright Act to Canada, failed and now they're attempting it again. This is in reality an example of Harper's fealty to corporate lobbying from powerful US industry groups such as the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America).

Michael Geist has been out there for years keeping his eyes on the government in the areas of privacy, copyright and internet issues. He's Canada's version of an Electronic Frontier Foundation. In a newspaper column 2 weeks ago he wrote about the signs that the Cons were going to do this before it occurred. He notes that:


> If the Ottawa rumour mill is correct, Industry Minister Jim Prentice will introduce copyright reform legislation in the next few weeks. The decision to forge ahead with the controversial reform package is a curious one. While the pressure from the United States to act continues to escalate - representatives from the U.S. Embassy paid a visit to the Parliamentary intellectual property caucus last week and caucus members plan to travel to Washington later this month ...


Geist notes the Cons apparent rush to get this type of legislation through even though they must know it will be unpopular:


> The general sense is that Prentice will introduce a copyright bill that claims to "modernize" the law. Assuming that the bill meets U.S. demands to largely mirror its Digital Millennium Copyright Act but avoids updating key consumer concerns such as fair dealing and the making of backup copies, it is almost certain to disappoint consumer and education groups. Moreover, by running afoul of the Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright (comprised of leading companies and associations including the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, the Retail Council of Canada, Telus, Rogers, Google, and Yahoo) the Industry Minister risks alienating a large swath of the Canadian business community.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Geist's column today asking Jim Prentice 10 questions about his legislation.



> 1. Days before you were scheduled to introduce the copyright bill, you claimed that Canadian business executives were anxious for copyright reform. In February 2008, however, the Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright, which features a who’s who of Canadian business (Telus, Rogers, Cogeco, SaskTel, MTS Allstream, Google, Yahoo, Retail Council of Canada, and Canadian Association of Broadcasters) spoke out against U.S.-style copyright legislation and in favour of an expanded fair dealing provision. Why is Canada's Industry Minister prepared to ignore the concerns of Canadian business?


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Michael Geist speculates on a cabinet shuffle, in the wake of the Bernier resignation:



> Jim Flaherty's DMCA?
> In the wake of Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier's resignation, there is growing speculation about a cabinet shuffle over the summer. Over the past few days, the focus has centred on swapping Jim Prentice and Jim Flaherty - Prentice goes to Finance and Flaherty to Industry.
> 
> If this is true, Prentice would have the luxury of introducing the Canadian DMCA next week safe in the knowledge that Flaherty will be forced to answer many challenging questions. Indeed, the talk in Ottawa is that Prentice has been pushing to put the bill on the fast track within the House with the possibility of summer hearings on the legislation (and the convenient ability to deflect questions by noting that the bill is before committee). A shuffle would be even better for Prentice - a bill opposed by many Canadians becomes Jim Flaherty's problem and he exits the issue largely unscathed. As for Flaherty, now might be a good time to start taking an interest in copyright policy.


Challenging questions indeed. The Cons are completely out to lunch on this issue. I think their blindside is that they think no one will really notice their capitulation to US industry lobbying, just as they did last fall. Meanwhile when people find out the details, they're outraged.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I e-mailed both my MP and the PM himself using the approximate wording as suggested by Ottawaman (thanks for that).

I got this reply from the PMO today:

Dear Mr. Sinclair:

On behalf of the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, I would like to thank you for your e-mail, in which you raised an issue which falls within the portfolio of the Honourable Jim Prentice, Minister of Industry. The Prime Minister always appreciates receiving correspondence on subjects of importance to Canadians.

Please be assured that the statements you made have been carefully reviewed. I have taken the liberty of forwarding your e-mail to Minister Prentice, so that he too may be made aware of your comments. I am certain that the Minister will give your views every consideration. For more information on the Government's initiatives, you may wish to visit the Prime Minister's Web site, at Prime Minister of Canada / Premier ministre du Canada.

L.A. Lavell
Executive Correspondence Officer
for the Prime Minister's Office

Nothing ventured, nothing gained they say, so I did my part.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

SINC said:


> I e-mailed both my MP and the PM himself using the approximate wording as suggested by Ottawaman (thanks for that).
> 
> I got this reply from the PMO today:
> 
> ...


Good for you SINC, I should do the same. I think my Conservative MP, Gary Lunn and his assistants just hit delete when they see my emails now.  Well, they probably don't actually, but snail mail works better. I usually get an eventual reply to those, sometimes with real signatures.

I should sell my politician's autograph collection on eBay, it's pretty illustrious.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

I guess the thing that scares the hell out of me about this is not so much music & movie files (of which I have none on my laptop, nor do I have an MP3 player), but photographs.

How long before some idiot at customs demands proof that the images on my laptop (of which there may be several thousand at any given time) actually belong to me?


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

I will go to Ottawa and protest. If this goes through, ehMac should organise some sort of movement. We could rent a bus or something and all go. I would be definitely down.


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

*SINC*, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but that's Ottawaese for "don't call us, we'll call you".

They'll do whatever harms them the least.

Not so for us.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

iJohnHenry said:


> *SINC*, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but that's Ottawaese for "don't call us, we'll call you".
> 
> They'll do whatever harms them the least.
> 
> Not so for us.


Maybe, maybe not, but did YOU write your MP and the PM?

If not, your comment is not at all of interest to me.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

iJohnHenry said:


> *SINC*, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but that's Ottawaese for "don't call us, we'll call you". They'll do whatever harms them the least.


But if enough write - they will see their votes disappearing - and really, they will do basically anything for votes. They would even do some acts right at your door way, if those acts were not illegal (at least in public), and you would be likely to swing a vote their way...


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

Between Bell, Rogers and the new copyright act the internet will be screwed. We are going to have to battle on this front too.

I'm going to fire off a letter to my MP, the minister responsible and the PM.

I wish the PM would remember that we are not the 51 state!


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

Humanity Lobotomy - Second Draft

YouTube - Humanity Lobotomy - Second Draft (10 minutes long)

Stop The Throttler!
Stop The Throttler! | Campaign for Democratic Media

SaveOurNet.ca | Protecting your Internet's level playing field


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

*Update:*

Today I received the following reply from my MP:

Dear Mr. Sinclair,

Thank you for your email regarding copyright reform in Canada. 

I appreciate being advised of your views and have carefully noted your comments with respect to this matter. Please be assured that the Government of Canada is aware of the sensitive nature of issues regarding digital rights management.

The cultural policy objective of the Copyright Act is to ensure adequate protection for creators and cultural content as well as appropriate access for all Canadians to cultural works.

Governmental officials will continue to monitor developments around the world as they plan the next steps that Canada will take on this matter. A bill will be introduced to the House of Commons once government officials are satisfied that they have the right balance between the rights of Canadian creators to be adequately protected by law, and the rights of the public to access works. 

Your interest in copyright reform is appreciated. Updates and further information on the ongoing copyright reform process are available on the Department of Canadian Heritage Web site at Copyright Policy Branch - Home

I thank you again for writing to me on this issue of importance to you, and I appreciate the opportunity to share my perspective.

Yours truly,


John G. Williams
Member of Parliament


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

I missed the part where Williams "share(d) his perspective."




SINC said:


> Today I received the following reply from my MP:
> 
> Dear Mr. Sinclair,
> 
> ...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

HowEver said:


> I missed the part where Williams "share(d) his perspective."


I guess you didn't read this paragraph then?

"The cultural policy objective of the Copyright Act is to ensure adequate protection for creators and cultural content as well as appropriate access for all Canadians to cultural works."


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

SINC said:


> I guess you didn't read this paragraph then?
> 
> "The cultural policy objective of the Copyright Act is to ensure adequate protection for creators and cultural content as well as appropriate access for all Canadians to cultural works."


I don't think that is Williams' perspective on the act.

He admits that the act is still being re-written in order to balance those issues.

Does he come down on the side of the creators and their content, or appropriate access? What does he think of the measures being proposed--are they fair, strict, harsh, necessary?

Any gradeschool child can parrot the "objectives" of the Act for you. It doesn't reveal where Williams stands on it. It may be premature to ask, since the bill is still being written. With luck, it will write itself out of existence--and what would Williams think about that?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Instead of picking apart responses to my efforts to stop the law, why not use that energy to write your own MP and the PM?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

SINC said:


> "The cultural policy objective of the Copyright Act is to ensure adequate protection for creators and cultural content as well as appropriate access for all Canadians to cultural works."


What a crock - fresh out of the parliamentary septic tank. This Act does nothing to protect the artists at all, just like the special "levy" for CD/DVD media does nothing to help them. It's all about making the big corporates wealthy, well paying patronage jobs with free steak dinners, and kickback schemes to the corrupt politicians who give us shoddy legislation that can not be enforced.

This legislation will simply lead to the hackers developing even better technology in order to move data around. It will also hurt the very same artists that the legislators with to "protect", because the artist will loose the right to distribute their works as they see fit (whether through low bit rate / low resolution samples or whatever they want).

It will simply supply funds to those who do not create anything or serve any useful purpose except to collect a large paycheque, while the artists continue on their struggles. This is a government that did pledge to bring "transparency" to the process, and that they did - it is entirely transparent that this mob of goons is even more corrupt and contempable than the previous mob of Martin a$$ki$$er$. At least none of Mr. Martin's people were sleeping with the Rizzuto brothers and the Hell's Angels and who knows who else!


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

Looks like they'll be tabling the C-DMCA on Thursday: Government of Canada to Table Bill to Amend the Copyright Act

Frankly I'm surprised that they managed to get this in before the Parliamentary recess.

Hopefully some of the rumours aren't true:


> -- Making it illegal to unlock cellphones or copy music from protected CDs to iPods
> 
> -- Forbidding the right to copy "time shifted" shows onto personal video recorders if flagged by broadcasters.


There should be some protection for "fair use" rights, and I can't see why I shouldn't be able to do as I please with *my* cellphone - as long as I don't try to obtain service fraudulently, or interfere with other devices.



> -- A $500 fine for each illegal file shared online


This doesn't sound too bad - as long as they set a maximum fine. I saw that someone in BC got a $2000 fine for cruelty to animals recently (-*MUCH*- worse than copyright infringement, IMHO...) so the limit should be well below that.

source of above quotes: Controversial copyright reform to be unveiled Thursday

I wonder if this will be a confidence motion?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

^^^
This Parliament does not deserve a recess - they deserve a good strapping for their tom foolery. They should have to stay in Parliament until they accomplish something of worth. It would be no different than a conclave, where they seal the Cardinals in until they elect a Pope. Seal these fools in until they produce one worthy piece of legislation (ie. something that is of benefit to the nation, devoid of acts of class warfare, and that stays far away from the pork barrel), then they can get their recess, and maybe even a five second sip of water from the fountain.

I still do not think that any cell phone should be locked. We are supposed to be a people of freedom, and this malarkey smacks of pinko communism Stalin style.

I don't know why a broadcaster would care if there is time shifting. In fact, time shifting is a big benefit because it allows people (like shift workers) to watch shows that they would never be able to see by any other means. They probably want people to buy the DVD collections of everything that will end up being syndicated anyways.

The puntative fines are a joke, it simply is a law that can not be practically applied or enforced. Nothing is worse than just adding junk laws to the books to crowd the courts up with cases that are going to be thrown out. Logically, this would mean that one would have to keep the receipts for every CD or DVD purchased for what amounts to an entire lifetime. And what about online services, like iTunes, where one does not get a receipt?

If they want to stiff us with DRM; then Rootkits should also be made illegal, as well as the ripoff contracts that musicians end up having to sign if they want to record an album.

In fact, many musicians are missing the very real opportunities afforded by the new frontier, where really, they can make more money by going online and not getting ripped off by the music companies. Even Walter Becker's new album is available for download online - which shows that a more independent approach can easily reach the expected audience.

I must also say that piracy has lead me to certain discoveries: of software that I would never have considered until I was able to try it and compare it to other software; or of musicians I have never listened to, and were never available at the record stores we no longer have. And really, books are becoming that way since most of the good bookstores are now gone, at least in this area. (Though less of a weakness because the independent bookstores that are left are really good at the business of selling.)

One of the problems is distribution. Software in stores is very difficult to find, and even the local Apple dealer has never been caught with the current OSX in stock! The good stores that had staff that knew music are gone, and the lonely HMV is left, staffed by high school rejects that are more worried about getting wasted at a dumb bush party than in doing their job. Sad, that even those who really do not want to pirate things end up doing it out of frustration.

Legislation really needs to be aimed at the large distributions where people are making money on fake software and fake CDs (that purport to be real), before they tackle the problem of lesser piracy.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

It's even worse than I thought:
Michael Geist - The Canadian DMCA: Check the Fine Print


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

PenguinBoy said:


> It's even worse than I thought:
> Michael Geist - The Canadian DMCA: Check the Fine Print


You know what, good luck! IF enforced, the courts are going to be so clogged with cases, they're going to give up or stop enforcing it. There's going to be one big bust as a deterrent and fizzle out from there.

Of course I could be wrong, but going after teens d/ling music really isn't good PR. They better be prepared for a media S storm when they start prosecuting.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> They better be prepared for a media S storm when they start prosecuting.


The media S storm is already starting.

If I was the opposition, I would use this to accuse the government of "Selling us out to US interests"...


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

PenguinBoy said:


> The media S storm is already starting.
> 
> If I was the opposition, I would use this to accuse the government of "Selling us out to US interests"...


I don't know if it is US interests, it certainly mirrors their policy, but I think the pressure is more from the movie/music industry.


----------



## danaekitty (Jan 11, 2008)

Here's a story I heard this morning - 

A kid someone I know knows downloaded a movie. Three days later, they got an email from Rogers telling them exatcly what time that movie had been downloaded and what else was open on the computer while it was downloading. Apparently, Paramount had somehow gotten wind of the download, wrote and angry email to Rogers, who in turn hastised their customer.

It's creepy how they somehow just _know._


----------



## danaekitty (Jan 11, 2008)

Also, apparently Limewire is one of the easiest programs to trace the downloads...so if you're still using it, STOP!!!


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

So what constitutes a being a publisher of content?

If I encrypt my drive, doesn't make it illegal for anyone, including the government to access my drive under these provisions?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

danaekitty said:


> A kid someone I know knows downloaded a movie. Three days later, they got an email from Rogers telling them exatcly what time that movie had been downloaded and what else was open on the computer while it was downloading. Apparently, Paramount had somehow gotten wind of the download, wrote and angry email to Rogers, who in turn hastised their customer...


It sure sounds like an urban myth.

Paramount does not have the staff to write special e-mail to everyone who pirates something of theirs, they'd have to have 10,000 people working on it every day, and half of them would have to be fluent in Chinese or Hindi.

Torrent protocols do leave a trail, however, since the files are packetized and drawn from a number of different sources, it would be difficult for a company like Rogers to reassemble the packets to see what it formed. Of course, it is doable, and the process can even be automated; but with the millions of torrents and the hundreds of millions of packets transmitted every second; they would indeed have to have quite the computer system to analyze, decrypt and reassemble the over 80 exabytes of data that is swapped on their network every year.

It would be more doable if the person had performed the download with a protocol like HttpGet or ftp - rather than a split and route by different paths and different times protocol that a torrent represents. Of course, even a torrent can be traced, given time and processing, but the numbers are really against them.

If they are saying that Limewire is somehow more prone to tracing, there is a case for it, since to my knowledge Limewire does not use some of the more advanced protocols, like Magnet Link; but people normally do not resort to the advanced features of any torrent client generally.

So perhaps there is some truthiness to the story; and I would really have to think that the person that was "caught" was engaged in some furtive behaviour, like using their entire bandwidth for torrents so as to set some kind of abuse flag off; or the dude was not just casually downloading a pirated movie, but rather, was flagrantly acting as a torrent hub with tens or hundreds of active files being swapped all the time. If the person was a big enough perpetrator, they could be subject to an actual investigation, but we are talking big because they have never shut down the big pirates, you know, the ones that operate in Agincourt...


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Wait a sec... doesn't this Bill make things like a Sling Box basically Illegal, or Airtunes for that matter?


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

JumboJones said:


> You know what, good luck! IF enforced, the courts are going to be so clogged with cases, they're going to give up or stop enforcing it. There's going to be one big bust as a deterrent and fizzle out from there.
> 
> Of course I could be wrong, but going after teens d/ling music really isn't good PR. They better be prepared for a media S storm when they start prosecuting.


Plus those teens will be of voting age in the not too distant future.

Me, I'm quite happy to pay for the vast majority of the music I'm looking for on iTunes. The quality is pretty consistent, and I suffer no guilt from ripping off the artist or their company. Oddly enough, if you want the new Eagles CD, it's one of the few you won't find on iTunes, leaving you with either P2P or Wal-Mart. They by-passed the record companies altogether because they're not fond of corporations. Some irony there.

If iTunes would have come along before Napster and Limewire, their might have been a chance to educate young people as to why it's wrong to pirate music and movies; namely, you're ultimately ripping off the very people you so admire. I know many kids who ONLY own pirated music. I think we may have missed the boat as a society a little on this one. It's tough to implement legislation like this considering all the files already in existence _weren't_ illegal at the time they were uploaded/downloaded.

If you charge a fair price for decent quality, most people will probably pay it. If you gouge, be prepared for a backlash. If I already own the vinyl album, the cassette, and the CD from a particular artist, I don't feel too bad about downloading the same songs for free since I've already reimbursed the artist and his/her recording label several times over. But if I _never_ reimburse the artist…


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> Oddly enough, if you want the new Eagles CD, it's one of the few you won't find on iTunes, leaving you with either P2P or Wal-Mart.


For a long time, The Beatles were not on iTunes because of the whole Apple thing going on.



> They by-passed the record companies altogether because they're not fond of corporations. Some irony there.


A lot of musicians get ripped of by the practices of the record companies. One need to look no further than The Artist Formerly Known As Prince...

[QUOTE}If you charge a fair price for decent quality, most people will probably pay it. If you gouge, be prepared for a backlash. If I already own the vinyl album, the cassette, and the CD from a particular artist, I don't feel too bad about downloading the same songs for free since I've already reimbursed the artist and his/her recording label several times over.[/QUOTE]

I for one never had (or have) a problem with purchasing music, as downloading it sucks out my bandwidth and takes a great deal of time on dial-up (and even a fair amount of time at the HotSpot, where a typical album takes two coffees to download!)

We have lost pretty much all of the record stores in The Hammer, though we did discover the new location of Sunrise Records (which I thought went under two years ago). We used to have Sams and MusicWorld - both are defunct. We have a pretty poor HMV with even worse staff and little selection, and there are a few used places which are obviously hit and miss. The one decent place left is in a fairly scary part of town with all of the mental patients, drug addicts, vagabonds, winos and truants. But if there was a proper record store - then it would be busy because nothing beats browsing for something new.

Half the time I end up downloading because to purchase a CD now requires a trip to Hogtown, and I may want to listen to something before I end up making a long trip to another city to buy the CD. I could order the CD online, but then I'd end up having to take a few days off to wait around for the courier, since they need a signature to leave a package. They could sent it via the post office - but like everything in this stupid city, there are none of those left either!


----------



## james_squared (May 3, 2002)

*Fyi*

From: CAUT - Copyright bill hurts education and research

"Copyright Bill Hurts Education and Research

(Ottawa – June 12, 2008) The group representing Canada’s academic community says the federal government’s new copyright legislation will restrict teachers’ and students’ access to electronic documents and on-line material.

“We are deeply disappointed that the Harper government caved in to the demands of the American entertainment industry and is limiting the rights of Canadians to access information and entertainment,” said James Turk, executive director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers.

CAUT is particularly concerned that the draft legislation will make it more difficult for university and college teachers and students to have access to learning materials. For example, the bill prohibits the circumvention of digital encryption – any device or technology that prevents copying. This means material that can be copied now if in a paper format, cannot be copied for any reason, including educational or research purposes, if it is in electronic format and digitally encrypted.

“In prohibiting all circumvention, the proposed legislation will lock down a vast amount of digital material, preventing its use for research, education and innovation,” said Turk.

CAUT is the national voice of more than 65,000 academic and general staff at universities and colleges across Canada."


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

I got this letter back from my MP:



> Dear Adrian,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am ever glad I have a Liberal MP is not down with Conservatives.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

In my day, when you said "I'm down with that" it meant you had the flu.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

james_squared said:


> From: ...the bill prohibits the circumvention of digital encryption – any device or technology that prevents copying.



The anti circumvention provisions are the worst part of Bill C-61 IMHO.

There are laws against breaking and entering, as there should be, but if I lock my keys in my own house I am able to pick the lock (or call someone who can) without fear of prosecution. We don't outlaw the locksmiths trade and tools because some people pick locks to break into houses - I don't see why circumventing copy protection is any different.

When hacking tools are outlawed, only outlaws will have hacking tools...


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

EvanPitts said:


> A lot of musicians get ripped of by the practices of the record companies.


An oldie but a goodie: Courtney Love redefines music piracy and blasts the RIAA | Salon Technology


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

iJohnHenry said:


> Then let's get RevCan on their ass.
> 
> Hell, they even look the other way for hookers, *as long as they pay their taxes*.


The Government does not need to "look the other way", as prostitution is perfectly *legal* in Canada. And of course hookers are expected to pay their taxes, same as anyone else who is gainfully employed.

"Canadian Prostitution Law
Prostitution is legal in all of Canada it has been part of the Federal Criminal Code since at least mid 1800s. It is similar to British law and laws in much of Europe. Local communities can establish brothels and have some other limited powers such as licensing and zoning but can not outlaw prostitution which flourishes throughout Canada. Many Canadian cities have required escort licensing. But all it does is raise money at the sexworkers expense, since there is no real advantage of being licensed other than to comply with a city revenue raising requirement since prostitution is legal anyway."

jb.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

Adrian. said:


> I am ever glad I have a Liberal MP is not down with Conservatives.


I'm happy with about 75% of the things the Conservatives do - but if Bill C-61 passes in its current form I know *I* won't be voting for them...


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

A .pdf comic book called "51st State" has been put up on the web. The subject is the Harper Government's new copyright legislation and it's presented in the forum of a comic book with links to all the arguments and counter-arguments. A list of further links is at the end.

Not entirely successful visually IMO, but lots of good info.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

PenguinBoy said:


> I'm happy with about 75% of the things the Conservatives do - but if Bill C-61 passes in its current form I know *I* won't be voting for them...


Is this also going to be presented as a confidence vote in the House? Couldn't the opposition just toss this out? I can't imagine that the Cons want to provoke an election over this.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

King Harpo is doing anything to get a vote of non-confidence, since he has long been keen of an election. But the longer he continues, the worse his administration looks because of the useless twits that inhabit his Cabinet.

Mr. Bernier should have used some of his brain power, at least he has the excuse that he has just taken too many steroids and ate too much protien powders. This excuse can not apply to Mr. Lunn, who has worked so much on his scheme to poison the Ottawa Valley and Montreal with his crackerjack ideas on running unsafe reactors that were built during the Diefenbaker ministry.

I am no Fiberal lover, but nothing is worse than these Tory spank monkeys who are nothing but Fiberal wusses who have a different head office in Ottawa.

I'm waiting for the election because I am most definitely going to vote Green. It's time to shake the cage up and get things moving forward again.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

PenguinBoy said:


> I'm happy with about 75% of the things the Conservatives do - but if Bill C-61 passes in its current form I know *I* won't be voting for them...


Really? Maybe Cons are different in Alberta but I don´t know how anyone who went through the Harris years says that. I know every party has had their dud, Bob Ray and his whole shin dig and all, but Harris definitely takes the crown for the worst politician ever in Ontario´s history in my books.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

Adrian. said:


> Really? Maybe Cons are different in Alberta but I don´t know how anyone who went through the Harris years says that. I know every party has had their dud, Bob Ray and his whole shin dig and all, but Harris definitely takes the crown for the worst politician ever in Ontario´s history in my books.


Conservatives are different in Alberta, but Alberta is also different than Ontario.

Provincially, the Conservatives have been in power without interruption since 1971 - and the Liberals haven't won an election since 1917.

In the last federal election the Conservatives won *all* the Alberta seats, and the Conservative candidate in my riding walked away with more than 75% of the popular vote.

I'm a born and bred Alberta red neck, so I don't usually have an allergic reaction to Conservative politicians - but if bill C-61 passes in it's current form I might even ask GA for advice on how to cast my ballot


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> A .pdf comic book called "51st State" has been put up on the web. The subject is the Harper Government's new copyright legislation and it's presented in the forum of a comic book with links to all the arguments and counter-arguments. A list of further links is at the end.


Thanks GA!

The comic book is available here http://www.appropriationart.ca/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/51_state.pdf if anyone is interested..

If I was the opposition, I would really be playing up the "51 State" message - and use this whole debacle as an example of "Selling us out to the Americans". I imagine this message might get some traction in Central Canada ridings where there is a close race between Liberals and Conservatives.

Of course, the big media interests also had a prominent Liberal on their payroll - Sarmite Bulte - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

In Canada we consistently have the best government that money can buy!


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

PenguinBoy said:


> In Canada we consistently have the best government that money can buy!


beejacon 

Too bad that Bell & Rogers have a lot of cash.

Great stuff! I'm looking forward to reading the comic.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

PenguinBoy said:


> I'm a born and bred Alberta red neck, so I don't usually have an allergic reaction to Conservative politicians - but if bill C-61 passes in it's current form I might even ask GA for advice on how to cast my ballot


:lmao: Welcome to the Communist-Hippie-Looney Left, Comrade.

My advice is always; the least worst candidate who looks like they could win. 

In AL that probably wouldn't leave you with much to choose from. (I guess Dreambird knows all about this problem - eh.) No doubt Harper isn't too worried about whether or not you vote for his party, his seats there are about as safe as is humanly possible. But if you lived elsewhere where his MPs aren't so entrenched, well, he might be inclined to worry a wee bit.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

PenguinBoy said:


> An oldie but a goodie: Courtney Love redefines music piracy and blasts the RIAA | Salon Technology


Geez, she's pretty astute when she's sober. No wonder she's a little jaded by the biz.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

fjnmusic said:


> Geez, she's pretty astute when she's sober. No wonder she's a little jaded by the biz.


Yeah, wow... that is some article. Sorry RIAA supporters, if that is how your industry works I have zero sympathy for you plight. You guys ever hear of Kodak, take a trip to Rochester and smell your future.

These Copyright Bills sound like that last dying gasps of an industry whose time has come and gone. I would like to see the RIAA try these tactics in the emerging Asian markets like China... good luck try to control file sharing there.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I read a quote online somewhere about the age of audio cassettes and how record companies paid the artists... they cost about half as much to produce, versus vinyl records, and yet they were paid LESS per cassette.

When the musician (I forget who it was) asked why, the exec replied with a smile "Because that's just the way it is."


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

The stories are legendary, here's a few from the top of my head:

Neil Young brought out a number of odd albums in the late 70's/early 80's, including the quite peculiar Trans album, so some record executive flipped out and told Neil to get back into the studio and make a "good old fashioned rock and roll album". Of course, Everybody's Rockin came out - which resulted in a law suit, that got thrown out because Neil did do what Geffin had asked of him...

Warner Brothers "copyrighted" Prince's name (his name is actually Prince Nelson), and part of the court action was to restrict Prince from using his name. As it stated in the court documents: The Artist Formerly Known As Prince. He also raced out a number of albums in quick succession in order to get out of his contract. The exact reasons for this were not revealed due to the terms of the settlement, but one could infer that Prince, having found a genre of music that was unique to himself, wanted to pursue it further - while the A&R people wanted him to become more "commercial". The resultant fight ended up with the strange unpronouncible symbol - which really went a long way to making the record company seem foolish.

The Doors also has issues, and they attempted to "become commercial", and next to one song that became a pop hit, the albums were kind of a disaster. But stuck with the contract, the record company kind of abandoned them all together, and evenually would not give them studio time. So The Doors ended up doing the recordings in their own place, and the final three albums with Jim Morrison remain classic to this day, Jim having been recorded while sitting on the toilet because of the acoustics.

Due to the terms of her contract, Mariah Carey was forced into the Glitter album. What was sad was that Mariah knew that she couldn't act - she couldn't even play herself in the Glitter movie. But the company didn't listen, and forced through the production of this disaster. Sony pressed 5 million CD's based on the hype they created - but were only able to peddle 65,000 copies. Her contract fulfilled, she resumed a fairly successful recording career, sans the A&R idiots. At one point she appeared on a Barbara Walters special where she did the whole interview laying on a couch. The record company spin was that she was ego-centric and suffering from mental disorders - the real reason is that the A&R people did not want her appearing, and told her that under the terms of her contract that she "will not be allowed to sit for an interview"...

As a side note, Sams in Toronto used to have their sales annex with some pretty cheap pricing. I ended up with twenty copies of Glitter based on their sale price of 39 cents (and it was buy three - get one free!), which was cheaper than just going out and buying the crystal cases I needed at Active Surplus...

It is certainly a pretty rotten industry to be in!


----------



## nick24 (Jul 11, 2006)

Here is my response to the email I received from Ministers Prentice and Vernier re C-61

"This email is an insult to my intelligence and a disgrace on behalf of the writers.

While the bullets points may be technically correct, practically, they are worthless. Let me give you a few examples
- If I record a TV show on my PVR, I have to watch the show within a small period of time. Given that I am going on vacation for two weeks, on my return, I will be performing a criminal act should I watch the shows.

- The vast majority of music currently sold does not contain 'digital locks'. C-61 now gives record companies et al carte blanche to add DRM to their CDs etc. Using iTunes or Windows Media Player (products found on 90% plus of Canadians' PCS) will not only turn me and millions of others into criminals, but if I take the music and put it onto my PC, I will be in similar breach of the law.

- Please inform me as to how many video cassettes you possess or when the last time you went to a video store and actually found a video to rent? Today's society is digital, not analogue, so granting me and Canadians this right is meaningless. I would also like you to explain to me why I should be forced to purchase another copy of the same material should a DVD become unreadable? After all, for taxation purposes, we have to maintain our records for at least 7 years, so why shouldn't I maintain my digital records in a similarly backed up fashion?

I do, however, agree with the statement regarding this being a made in Canada approach, Damn straight! No other country has has come close to imposing such a backward, US inspired, crippling piece of legislation that moves Canada back not forward and makes us and in particular Minister Prentice, look like the global village idiot. 

I also consider this email to be spam, as my original email to Minister Prentice concerned ACTA, not Bill C-61."

Original email received

The Government of Canada has introduced Bill C-61, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act. The proposed legislation is a made-in-Canada approach that balances the needs of Canadian consumers and copyright owners, promoting culture, innovation and competition in the digital age.
What does Bill C-61 mean to Canadians?
Specifically, it includes measures that would:
- expressly allow you to record TV shows for later viewing; copy legally purchased music onto other devices, such as MP3 players or cell phones; make back-up copies of legally purchased books, newspapers, videocassettes and photographs onto devices you own; and limit the "statutory damages" a court could award for all private use copyright infringements;
- implement new rights and protections for copyright holders, tailored to the Internet, to encourage participation in the online economy, as well as stronger legal remedies to address Internet piracy;
- clarify the roles and responsibilities of Internet Service Providers related to the copyright content flowing over their network facilities; and
provide photographers with the same rights as other creators.

What Bill C-61 does not do:
it would not empower border agents to seize your iPod or laptop at border crossings, contrary to recent public speculation

What this Bill is not:
it is not a mirror image of U.S. copyright laws. Our Bill is made-in-Canada with different exceptions for educators, consumers and others and brings us into line with more than 60 countries including Japan, France, Germany and Australia


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

EvanPitts said:


> The stories are legendary, here's a few from the top of my head:
> 
> Neil Young brought out a number of odd albums in the late 70's/early 80's, including the quite peculiar Trans album, so some record executive flipped out and told Neil to get back into the studio and make a "good old fashioned rock and roll album". Of course, Everybody's Rockin came out - which resulted in a law suit, that got thrown out because Neil did do what Geffin had asked of him...
> 
> ...


EvanPitts, you've nailed it pretty well. My sum up, if I may, is:

This legislation is designed to protect less that a handful of large entertainment distributors. It has nothing to do with consumers or artists. The dinosaurs have money and are buying legislation to protect themselves, nothing more. Abandon the legislation and the market will solve this problem. Apple's, and others, rates for a song are pretty reasonable. I just hope the musician sees 2/3rds of the money. (Can somebody enlighten me on that...)


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

^^^
The recording industry was not always like that. At one time, they really did take huge risks for little reward. For instance, Levon Helm talked about the fact that in the late 50's/early 60's, The Hawks would be able to make $500 for a weekend of playing, and goes on to equate that to the fact that if they had pooled their money together - they could buy a new Cadillac every 10 weeks. So in those days, it was live gigs and touring that made the real money - records were a fringe item that were never expected to "make money", but rather bring people out to see the live shows.

I compare that to ten years ago, when I was working with some local bands. So a local band with a big following, guess what they might take in on a weekend? You guessed it, $500! The venues are smaller because unlike the early 60's, people do not have to come out to listen. So if the band pooled their money together every week (if they were so lucky to have such a set of gigs over the long term), they would be able to buy a Cadillac every 2 and a half years. Recordings are no longer a way of getting people out to the shows (where the musicians/bar owners make the money), but rather, the live gigs get people to buy the recordings.

So the industry operates by the old set of rules, a paradigm where the record company takes a large risk for possibly slim rewards, while musicians made the real money touring. But now that touring is not the big money any more, record companies hold the balance of power. What it will take is for more musicians to become more business savvy, and more in control of their own distribution. Until the musicians can stop dreaming about huge recording contracts. Wait, musicians really just need to take the complex recording contracts to an actual lawyer to see what it in them. Most of them just sign whatever, consigning their work to the devil incarnate...

It is much like Star Trek. After Desilu Studios spent the wad on signing the big names for the show, they could only offer Nimoy actors scale plus 10% of the residuals. He signed, and though he made less money during the run of the show than pretty much all of the other main actors, well, we all know how many millions Star Trek has raked in over the years. He would have been the odd man out, on skid row, if syndication had never changed the business...


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

So have you read about the Eagles exclusive deal with Wal-Mart to distribute their newest recording, wherein they bypass the record companies altogether? Can't even get it on iTunes (now the top retailer in the U, S and A). Kind of an interesting move, although it's probably much easier if you're already famous.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

EvanPitts said:


> ^^^It is much like Star Trek. After Desilu Studios spent the wad on signing the big names for the show, they could only offer Nimoy actors scale plus 10% of the residuals. He signed, and though he made less money during the run of the show than pretty much all of the other main actors, well, we all know how many millions Star Trek has raked in over the years. He would have been the odd man out, on skid row, if syndication had never changed the business...


Nimoy also does the voice over intro for the new Star Trek movie due out in December, although he sounds more like an old cowboy than a Vulcan now.


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

I remember the bands I worked with the the 80's getting paid $100.00 a gig!

The really popular bands, and older musicians that have a good back catalogue often tour for the money now, as they make no money off their record sales.

In Canada, are there not agreed percentages for earnings for the artist, producer and distributor?

If your in the music business the first two things I'd get is a lawyer and an accountant. Retain them, if there is even the scent of success they will be worth their weight in gold.

This new copyright bill is like a lead yoke to both the artist and the consumer. I say that because it attempts to entrench the current players and the current business patterns. Let a new business model appear! And yes, do go after those who really rip off the producers of our arts, not those who wish to back up their DVD collection!


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

EvanPitts said:


> The stories are legendary, here's a few from the top of my head:
> 
> Neil Young brought out a number of odd albums in the late 70's/early 80's, including the quite peculiar Trans album, so some record executive flipped out and told Neil to get back into the studio and make a "good old fashioned rock and roll album". Of course, Everybody's Rockin came out - which resulted in a law suit, that got thrown out because Neil did do what Geffin had asked of him...
> 
> ...


Great stories, Evan! I love the behind-the-music stuff.


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

*How the U.S. Got Its Canadian Copyright Bill*



> How the U.S. Got Its Canadian Copyright Bill
> 
> 
> Monday June 16, 2008
> ...


Michael Geist - How the U.S. Got Its Canadian Copyright Bill


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

> How the U.S. Got Its Canadian Copyright Bill


 

In this case the truth wont set you free, but it may cost you a lot of seats in the next general election!


----------

