Canadian Official Admits Last Copyright Bill Was Solely About Keeping US Diplomats Happy
from the and-the-latest? dept
One of the points that Michael Geist has made time and time again is that it seems like all of the attempts at copyright reform in Canada (and, I would argue, in many other countries) has had little to do with setting up the best system for either creators or the public, but about satisfying demands from the US (which are funneled from the entertainment industry through diplomats, through processes like the USTR's infamous Special 301 report). Geist now points us to a new paper, where the chief of staff of the Industry Minister back when the last copyright bill was introduced admits that it was entirely about satisfying the US. There's no subtly here at all:Of particular significance are comments Haggart obtained from Michele Austin, who served as Maxime Bernier's chief of staff when he was Industry Minister.This is tremendously problematic for a variety of reasons. While the pro-stronger-copyright's more entertainingly ridiculous spokespeople are trying to spin a new story about how modern copyright only works if it's all based on the US's system, that's empirically absurd. The problem, as has been shown over and over and over again, is the simple fact that there remains no empirical evidence that stronger copyright benefits either creators or society as a whole. In fact, a lot of the evidence these days suggests exactly the opposite. Because of that, locking the entire world into a single system, based on nothing but claims from a particular industry, seems unwise. In fact, you would think that the exact opposite position would make sense. We would be much better off with a system where countries tested varying types of copyright law, so that we could actually see the impact and start to make actual decisions based on the data, not claims from those who abuse the system for profit. Tragically, rather than do that, it looks like Canada has decided to just go with the most political expedient system, even if that comes at the expense of content creators and the public at large.
According to Austin, the decision to introduce U.S.-style DMCA rules in Canada in 2007 was strictly a political decision, the result of pressure from the Prime Minister's Office desire to meet U.S. demands. She states "the Prime Minister's Office's position was, move quickly, satisfy the United States." When Bernier and then-Canadian Heritage Minister Bev Oda protested, the PMO replied "we don't care what you do, as long as the U.S. is satisfied."
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Re: 3rd Strike?
However that doesn't mean we should rest on our laurels. I have already wrote and sent a letter to my MP, the opposition and the PM (though as if he really cares), and have been informing everyone I know about the bill and to do the same. Many of my friends and family are now involved. I hope all Canadians will do the same.
As well, in general, I appreciate every day that we have someone like Michael Geist who brings these issues both to the light and in a way that everyone can understand. Without his knowledge and organization of the resistance to these changes, I couldn't imagine where Canadians would be right now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 3rd Strike?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow, I'd not heard that one before. It could be true, I mean look at how the UK has no successful artists due to their copyright... erm, I mean Canada... France? Australia? Japan? India's film industry isn't so big, right? What morons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gonna go out on a limb and say you meant "neither".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
whoa
Well, why don't we just execute all the infidels to make the taliban happy?
Honestly, completely revamping laws to appease another nation is ridiculous on so many levels and basically morally bankrupt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sigh...
...We stand on guard for theeeeeeeeeeeee!
Seriously, though. Situations like this are why man invented the revolution. Dear lord, Canadians, you have a wonderful country up there. How about electing someone who will tell the industry in MY country to go outside and play hide and go fuck themselves?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sigh...
...
How about electing someone who will tell the industry in MY country"
Hypocrite. So you want other countries to go through the effort of a revolution but you don't want to do it in your own country? Well, I guess I'm a hypocrite too then :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sigh...
Well, I guess if you identify me as all Americans, then I'm a hypocrite, but of course I'm not. I vote, I write semi-regularly to my elected officials, I talk to people about this stuff, I point people towards TechDirt, etc. etc. etc.
Revolutions don't have to be violent, and then don't have to be lightning quick.
But to your point, yes, I wish my own country's citizens would get off their collective asses a little bit more too...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sigh...
this stuff makes me so mad i want to revolt. then i take a bunch of xanax and watch american idol.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It would be a lot easier....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It would be a lot easier....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CA politicians make laws to keep the US happy, which in turn are being pushed by the US congress to keep politicians happy, in turn those corporations give piles of cash to the politicians.
If Canada just gave up on this whole "independent country" concept and became an assortment of new states.
If some people get their way, that's exactly what will happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When did the RIAA, MPAA and other assorted groups become the US Diplomatic Arm?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Make US happy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Make US happy?
Living next door to the US is like living next door to a biker gang.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Varying amounts of enforcement already exist and the results are already plain to see. Lack of IP rights in combination with the onset of piracy has two uniform outcomes: a flood of regional, shoe-string budget fare (Nigeria, India) or greatly reduced output (Malaysia, Honk Kong, Spain etc)
Which countries produce the most books?
Which countries spend the most on pharmaceutical R&D?
Which countries produce the most NEW (not knock-off generics) pharmaceuticals?
Which countries make the most popular and best selling films, the world over?
Which countries support the largest body of professional artists?
Which countries contain the highest paid creative class?
Which countries export the most creative talent via foreign reprints, foreign theatrical, and worldwide musical tours?
ANSWER: The countries that enforce IP.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The answer to ALL of your questions is the countries with the highest GDPs and highest consumer capital.
IP enforcement doesn't mean much when your country can't afford anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL2FOrx41N0
12:26
http://techdirt.com/articles/20091118/ 1002136992.shtml
Now continue on to accuse Mike of bootstrapping. Don't forget to call him The Masnick while you're at it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"Previously, economic development had been hindered by years of military rule, corruption, and mismanagement, the restoration of democracy and subsequent economic reforms have successfully put Nigeria back on track towards achieving its full economic potential. It is now one of the largest economies in Africa, and the largest economy in the West Africa Region [2]."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria
[emphasis added]
Nothing to do with IP laws. Part of the reason America was originally more prosperous and innovative than the rest of the world is partly because it was initially very critical of IP laws, as the founding fathers have demonstrated.
and if you read the rest of it you'll see that Nigeria's economy is improving.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"Gradually annexed by the British East India Company from the early eighteenth century and colonised by the United Kingdom from the mid-nineteenth century, India became an independent nation in 1947 after a struggle for independence that was marked by widespread non-violent resistance."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India
But now that they received their independence they're recovering from the lack of freedom that was imposed on them and are doing better. Again, recovery and improvement take time, doesn't happen over night. So don't go throwing examples of countries around without knowing their history.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
(Wikipedia)
Again, nothing to do with IP. While the article goes on to say that India still has problems, recovery and prosperity take time, doesn't happen over night.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These people also think that 95 year/lifetime of artist + 70 year terms are somehow beneficial to society and that position is also absurd and makes it obvious that the true motives of IP maximists are nefarious. Almost nothing that these people say has an credibility, they say what they say only to promote their own selfish agenda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To lead, over there means, to "bully" everyone into compliance or else.
This will get them in trouble as other countries learn to do the same and start applying it to the U.S..
Right now if China says sit, you can bet Obama will be sitting.
The funny thing is that most Americans believe in that BS, that people need to be bullied to do something, somewhere along the way the "lets talk", "lets work together" died, there is no dialogue any more only leverage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We won't know until it actually comes out. They keep flip-flopping, trying to put in something that is completely about making US Diplomats happy, then when too many people protest too much, they backpedal, then the US gets mad and they start over again (maybe hoping no one is paying attention this time?). Right now they are starting to backpedal a bit I think but we won't know how much, or if it will change again until we actually see a bill passed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How bad laws get passed
So , it could fail a 100 times, but eventually, they will be able to have the numbers to make it pass, even if only by 1 vote. You can just keep on hammering it down until you get a lucky breach. This should not be possible. There should be a limit on how many times you can try to pass a law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The new C32 is no different then the last one, even if they argue otherwise.
Currently I am following Tony Clement on Twitter and he's made some, uhhh, interesting answers/comments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
what is the use in having user rights that the CR holders have veto power over?
I looked in the FAQ on the website, but it wasn't there.. Whats up with that eh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ok to those that read the changes heres a synapses
B) if yu break a digital lock - it depends on whetahr it was commercial or non commercial and ironically you can for non commercial now gt mor eof a fine then a commercial infringement
C) you also get fined per infringement
D) they have the right to wave these fines and sue you for millins like they do in the usa and THEY WILL WHY?
Cause if they don't waive the fines then YOU CAN ONLY get nailed for ONE INFRINGMENT
ITS weird wording.
E) there is some real strange wording that almost makes it seem like if they hoard copyrighted material the term can last as long as 99YEARS IF THEY DONT publish it for the first 49 years.
F) they give you all kinds of rights to copy stuff you buy BUT take them away as soon as there is a digital lock.
AND GEIST says this can be fixed ?
84% said they didnt want a new law
75% said they wanted a lower term
85% said no DRM
G)the way things are so vague its possible that any thing that is technological even your car door or house door could suddenly fall under the legislation. BAD real bad...
H)VHS owners will be happy that its now definitely illegal or will be if you have a library of vhs tapes
PVR owners will not be able to continue to keep stuff....or move it to another media to store and watch agan even if you paid for it.
I) due to the section on TPMS i really think some open source people need to have a serious look cause what i read would me if i wanted to modify open source that had a technological protection measure like a file system or login system for my own use id need to get written permission form the original people and that measn more hassles.
i know that the GPLv3 prohibits this but im not sure on GPLv2
FREEBSD also not sure
If it means that because the attributes on a file are a technological protection measure ( read write stuff and hidden etc ) then every time yo touch a file , YOU will need permission form the os maker and then the files creator if not you. OR you would in effect be breaking the law.
In the short sightedness to try and prevent p2p downloading and such they have opened a great big ball of love for the people of canada.
AND from what i saw on cbc video live site this bill won't make it. THE conservatives have devolved into a bunch a thugs again and are they think doign that cause it makes people want to vote for them( yelling POINT OF ORDER whle someone is trying to get out a ruling )
mouthing off women at every chance they can , i wonder if these guys are heterosexual and ill say it if any conservative acted like that in my home they'd be leaving with a black eye and bloody nose, regardless of the jail time i'd have to do.
MISTER GESIST and i began our parting of the ways when he came out in favor of TPM - which is hard ware based DRM as discussed 1.5 years ago and after the SONY ROOTKIT affair , which btw this law would then make legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@mike geist
AND has the cria been paying artists for the copyright cash it gets from the cdr levy and were supposed to pay the levy still and get fined for having put stuff on it?
SECTION 12 charter of rights and freedoms GOOGLE IT
have look at 2 , and 7 as well
OH and ask why they put the revisit every 5 years in the bill....and then look at the not withstanding clause time limit of 5 years
SO harper is going to suspend YOUR CIVIL rights to pander to
americans
I AM GETTING WERY WERY ANGWY WISTER HARPER
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bend over Canada!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]