Copyright Lobby Wants Canada Out of TPP Until Stronger Copyright Laws Passed 164
An anonymous reader writes "'The U.S. government just concluded a consultation
on whether it should support Canada's entry into the Trans Pacific
Partnership negotiations.' The TPP raises significant concerns
about extension of copyright and digital locks, so that might be a good
thing. However, Michael Geist reports
that the IIPA, which represents the major
movie, music, and software lobby associations, sees this as an
opportunity to force Canada to enact a Canadian DMCA and to implement
ACTA."
Bye Bye America (Score:2, Insightful)
Good riddance MAFIAA, Your country will find itself increasingly isolated, because Canada will still carry on trading with other countries including Europe and Australia, and will probably set up it's own treaty to NEVER trade with your government until this retarded nonsense stops. I'm being 100% serious :P
Canadians, this is your chance (Score:5, Insightful)
US is not a member of TPP anyway. (Score:4, Insightful)
Wait, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
opportunity to force Canada to enact
What the FUCK am I reading?!
I'm not sure what's more offensive: That they're so used to ignoring the democratic process in the US they ACTUALLY think this way, that ANY government thinks ACTA/DMCA helps further scientific progress and the arts, or that Corporations can throw their weight around in the political arena without being boycotted into oblivion.
Re:Can't have it both ways... (Score:4, Insightful)
TPP Does NOT Need America (Score:5, Insightful)
I respect Canada for placing *their* needs before that of the US unlike the New Zealand and Australian governments act of total, complete and utter capitulation.
TPP doesn't need the US and Canada should be brave enough to propose direct negotiation with Australia, New Zealand, Brunei and Singapore. When you include the United Kingdom then these four Commonwealth realms have so very much more in common than a shared and separate Head of State. Our support of democracy, human rights, the doctrine of common law, a single language and our Westminster Parliamentary tradition to entreat with our contemporises in Brunei and Singapore. Diplomats already refer to these four nations as CANZUK then by including both Brunei and Singapore we'd have a trading pact second only to the US, Japan, the EU and China (with NZ already in an FTA with China and Australia very likely soon to follow).
It's the Commonwealth unification of similar minds and morals for *our* own mutual benefit instead just American copyright holders who continue to extend their copyright period.
Is it just me? (Score:4, Insightful)
Recall the days when Microsoft was "partnering" itself with just about everyone in order to get them to give up whatever it is they have that's valuable or useful for next to nothing and then Microsoft screws them over somehow after they've got it? (It's probably still going on, we just hear less about it or business has finally started to catch on..?)
Doesn't this seem eerily like what the US copyright interests are doing through the US government? Setting up partnerships and trade agreements and ultimately screwing the other parties over and/or manipulating them to do their bidding? How much longer before they start catching on? I get the feeling they are already catching on somehow...
Re:TPP Does NOT Need America (Score:5, Insightful)
TPP doesn't need the US and Canada should be brave enough to propose direct negotiation with Australia, New Zealand, Brunei and Singapore.
As a New Zealander I can confidently say the the NZ government will only negotiate as the US government directs them too anyway. Australia will probably not be much different.
Re:Can't have it both ways... (Score:5, Insightful)
Fair use does involve copying and sharing, but since the use is 'fair', there is absolutely no reason that the recording industry should be receive any money. As I understand it, the tax really only covers personal backups and mixtapes. That is not within the realm of what copyright should be allowed to dictate.
That's a very strange notion. "To make money" is not something you can really have an explicit right to do. Copyright gives authors a specific opportunity to make money that a market without it would not offer. And I do not accept that even having that is a right of an author. Instead, it is (in theory) a means to an end of enriching the public.
Natural Devolution (Score:5, Insightful)
Just what do you expect? First, concentrated interests learn through trial-and-error how to influence, control and capture their most relevant regulators and legislators. Once this is done (Sonny Bono copyright extention of 1995), they look to extend their power and influence further afield, in this case to foreign governments.
This is just business as usual and the concentrated interests can pay for it. The real problem is the dilute interests (public at large) does not individually have enough money at stake to do anything. This inertia allows the concentrated interests to prevail. The US Constitution protects against some abuses, but more active measures are necessary. A static, defensive strategy always loses in the long term.
Re:Can't have it both ways... (Score:5, Insightful)
Authors (and musicians, and whoever else falls under copyright these days) have no right to make money off their products. They have an opportunity to do so, an opportunity that is denied anyone who does not hold the copyright to the piece in question.
There is no right to make money. There is only opportunity, and with copyright that opportunity is made exclusive to the copyright-holder.