Canadian Parliament Threatens People For Posting Video Of Proceedings Online
from the how-dare-you-want-transparency dept
It would appear that the Canadian Parliament is no big fan of transparency. When some activists started posting video and audio of various Parliamentary committee proceedings online, in order to both increase transparency and to comment on those proceedings, lawyers apparently sent them a cease and desist, claiming it was "contempt of Parliament." They've also been sending takedowns to YouTube and other video hosting sites, claiming that this content is somehow proprietary, covered by "crown copyright" (something, thankfully, we don't have in the US) and subject to severe licensing restrictions. While it sounds like some Canadian politicians recognize the need to change, in the meantime, they're making a travesty of any sense of governmental openness.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: canada, crown copyright, openness, parliament, transparency
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
As a Canadian, this makes me sick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you read the article, the committee made a reasonable compromise:
"Reproduction of the proceedings of the House of Commons and its Committees, in whole or in part and in any medium, is hereby permitted provided that the reproduction is accurate and is not presented as official."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Crown Copyright
No, the Constitution prohibits the government from owning copyright on any government documents or proceedings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Crown Copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Crown Copyright
I think it makes sense that stuff paid for through tax dollars can't be copyrighted by the government (Hubble pictues?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Canada - The 51st state!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh Dear, Canada
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh Dear, Canada
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Oh Dear, Canada
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Oh Dear, Canada
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fatcat
Regards the other commentor's remarks, it would be appropriate they know more of the in depth details and dogma before missing the mark with remarks!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And the US trade representative has the nerve to say that Canada has weaker IP protection than the US. You guys don't even have Crown Copyright. We do ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]