Canada's New DMCA Considered Worst Copyright Law 234
loconet writes "The government of Canada is preparing to attempt to bring a new DMCA-modeled copyright law in Canada in order to comply with the WIPO treaties the country signed in 1997. (These treaties were also the base of the American DMCA.) The new Canadian law will be even more restrictive in nature than the American version and worse than the last Canadian copyright proposal, the defeated Bill C-60. Among the many restrictive clauses in this new law, as Michael Geist explains, is the total abolishment of the concept of fair use: 'No parody exception. No time shifting exception. No device shifting exception. No expanded backup provision. Nothing.' Geist provides a list of 30 things that can be done to address the issues."
Unlikely (Score:5, Interesting)
That said, if there is any sort of Canadian Consumers user group that I could contribute to in order to help oppose ridiculous lobby-funded wastes of our government (and people!)'s time like this, I'd be more than willing to contribute...
Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
What about television news shows? If the equivalent of the concept of fair use doesn't exist, are they no longer permitted to report on issues for which they didn't do the original information gathering? What if it's a cited work?
I admit, I only read the summary for this one, but based on the summary, it appears to be one of the first (if only) accurate Slashdot article titles ever. This truly is the worst copyright law ever conceived. For that matter, it sounds like it would take a truly stupendous lapse in the mental faculties of any politician involved in order to come to the point where one thinks that this would be a good idea.
Well, at least there's another reminder that American politicians aren't the only stupid ones...not that such is really encouraging.
Better not (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd say better not. It'd be much better if the law would be passed in that very form. The stronger the law, the less likely it'll ever be enforced. Judges will have to impose penalties to normal people that will have just taped some program for later viewing. Probably the judge himself will have done the same. Probably most of the people voting "yes" for the law will have done the same. The situation will be really untenable, and the whole law will gather dust. If they end with a "reasonable" law, perhaps they'll end up really enforcing it.
Re:Wait a minute... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Contact Your MP (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Not news (Score:3, Interesting)
We too have elected a neocon. [independent.co.uk]. (although I don't include myself in that "we", having campaigned for years against that guy and his policies.)
In Soviet Kanukistan copyright p0wns YOU! (Score:3, Interesting)
Or just host fair use/parody/etc on servers in the US, outside the jurisdiction of Canadian courts. If it works for the White Aryan Nation whack-a-moles (who moved their servers from Canada to the US to escape Canadian laws about propagating hate literature), it can work for everyone else ...
Relationship w/ Government (Score:4, Interesting)
I can't find the reference, now, but thought it relevant. Maybe someone can find it?
Re:Not news (Score:5, Interesting)
Which American politicians pushed on the members of the WIPO after they'd been lobbied by the *AAs.
The bending has already happened, and, yes, America were the original instigators of these measures. They insisted that everyone else adopt these laws, because they wanted to protect the American movie and music industries.
This is not adhering to international treaties that everyone else in the world decided we needed. It was in response to pressure from American interests that it all happened in the first place.
Bush is still an ass, but, I don't know if these measures were pushed on his watch or Clintons. But, don't pretend that American interests weren't being served when these treaties were signed.
Cheers
the world won't stop.. (Score:3, Interesting)
the world will NOT stop if the mega-rich media moguls make a little less money in the new 'digital millennia' (god, I hate that phrase). why do they have a 'god given right' to extort money from customers but the customers get less and less fair-use rights, over time?
lawmakers, please stop being slaves to media corporations. we all know they help pay your salary (kickbacks) but we, the real citizens, also contribute to your salary (our tax base). please don't forget you are there to serve neutrally and fairly.
Re:Not news (Score:2, Interesting)
RTFA that is linked. It's satire.
smart (Score:3, Interesting)
onus dissected (Score:3, Interesting)
There is no possible interpretation of democratic process in which the rights of a nation can be signed away *prior* to disclosing to the citizens of the country the precise implementation in law. Irregardless of any pretense that we, as a nation, have "already signed" this treaty, in fact, every signatory nation understands that you can't sign away fundamental democratic and constitutional rights, which includes the rights of the population to reject faulty implementations of those promises on an indefinite basis, if that needs to happen. Our minions in power seem determined to put this to the test.
In my view, what the signatory process actually promises is that the government will attempt to pass laws, within the constraints of our natiional legislative and constitutional process. In doing this much, our government is upholding its promise.
Now we need to vote this bill as presently written into the sewer, so that our government can continue their efforts to uphold their promise by doing a far better job on the next iteration. If it proves that the nation will not accept any legislative implementation of our treaty promise, then they need to go back to their treaty convention and apologize for misunderstanding the will of the people, suggest somes mean by which the failed treaty itself can be repaird, and perhaps refund in humility some expensive dinners obtained at the expense of the expensive suits of the MPAA.
Impressive! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Wait a minute... (Score:5, Interesting)
[TMB]
I worry that Public Domain itself will bite it (Score:2, Interesting)
It sounds insane, but have you looked at the laws being pushed through the US Congress these days? They're little more than corporate wish lists written in legalese.