Canadian DMCA to be introduced in June

[Pastiche]

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5008/125/

As I reported last week, Moore has argued for a virtual repeat of Bill C-61, with strong digital locks provisions similar to those found in the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act and a rejection of a flexible fair dealing approach. Consistent with earlier comments on the need for a forward-looking, flexible approach, Clement argued for changes from C-61.

With mounting pressure from the U.S. - there have repeated meetings with senior U.S. officials in recent weeks - the PMO sided squarely with Moore's vision of a U.S.-style copyright law. The detailed provisions will be negotiated over the coming weeks by the respective departments, but they now have their marching orders of completing a bill that will satisfy the U.S. that comes complete with tough anti-circumvention rules and no flexible fair dealing provision.

[Hack&Lube]

That sucks.

The bill is not expected until June, but it will have dramatic repercussions once introduced. First, the bill represents a stunning reversal from the government's seeming shift away from C-61 and its commitment to a bill based on the national copyright consultation. Instead, the consultation appears to have been little more than theatre, with the PMO and Moore choosing to dismiss public opinion. Second, after adopting distinctly pro-consumer positions on other issues, Moore has abandoned that approach with support for what may become the most anti-consumer copyright bill in Canadian history. Third, the bill will immediately impact the Canadian position at the ACTA and CETA negotiations, where the bill's provisions on anti-circumvention and ISP liability will effectively become the Canadian delegation position.

For those wondering what can be done, my only answer is to speak out now. Write a paper letter to your Member of Parliament and send copies to the Prime Minister, Moore, Clement and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff. No stamp is required - be sure to include your home address and send it to the House of Commons, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0A6. Once that is done, join the Facebook group and the Facebook page and be sure to ask others do the same. You may spoken out before, but your voice is needed yet again.

[REDVAN]

Will this mean that downloading files from the internet for my personal enjoyment will be illegal? Or does it mean I won't be allowed to share stuff online? Both?

I really only care about downloading the occasional CD/TV show.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by fotze

I can only assume that those of us who pay to download will get a reduction in the cost due to the increased revenues?

Nobody pays for music. C'mon.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

Will this mean that downloading files from the internet for my personal enjoyment will be illegal? Or does it mean I won't be allowed to share stuff online? Both?

I really only care about downloading the occasional CD/TV show.

1. The exception for downloading personal copies only extends to music. It has never been "legal" to download a tv show.

2. Previous versions of Canadian copyright reform that died on various order papers sought to eliminate the private copying exception. Stands to reason this new version will too.

Originally Posted by fotze

I can only assume that those of us who pay to download will get a reduction in the cost due to the increased revenues?

Not only that, but the blank media levy can be eliminated too! Why pay a tax for an activity that is no longer lawful to do under the new legislation?

[To Be Quite Honest]

I can see a great increase in hacked wireless download. It will be the neighbors of the hackers who would pay. This bill is not the answer. The PTB need to figure out how to adapt and not force the public.

Anyone here actually care what the USA thinks?

[jayswin]

I suspect Canadians are going to be downloading the **** out of everything until June.

[Jimmy Stang]

The scariest part of C-61 (which this new legistration seems to mimic) is the fact that you could have your pants sued off for ripping a LEGALLY PURCHASED DVD to a media server, iPod, etc. if in doing so you would have to circumvent DRM.

So you buy a movie and you're essentially a criminal for wanting to use it in a way that is in line with how people consume media in this century.

Did I mention that this is a legally purchased movie, and strictly for your own personal, non-commercial use? You'd still be breaking the law. In fact, Bill C-61 proposed penalties of up to $20,000 per infraction for doing what I mentioned above, and only $500 per infraction for downloading it on bit torrent.

Absolutely brutal.

[Blaster86]

Gutsy move by the Conservatives. The one thing that has kept Harper in power and without fear of election is no one has looked at him and thought "He's in bed with the US." He's been very moderate and to be quite honest easy to deal with.

This could blow up in his face real quick.

[Prototype]

It's not so much fun to stay in the DMCA...

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Gutsy move by the Conservatives. The one thing that has kept Harper in power and without fear of election is no one has looked at him and thought "He's in bed with the US." He's been very moderate and to be quite honest easy to deal with.

This could blow up in his face real quick.

I don't think there's a single politician that understands these issues.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Shazam

I don't think there's a single politician that understands these issues.

I agree, and most are smart enough to leave it well enough alone to save their own asses.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Not only that, but the blank media levy can be eliminated too! Why pay a tax for an activity that is no longer lawful to do under the new legislation?

Somehow I doubt that will happen.

[Azure]

Well, I'll be contacting my MP.

Again. About this issue.

I suggest everyone do the same.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well, I'll be contacting my MP.

Again. About this issue.

I suggest everyone do the same.

Did you get a response from your MP last time? Just curious, because I did not...

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Azure

Somehow I doubt that will happen.

Oh ye of little faith. It makes sense that if the government is going to adjust the balance of rights and responsibilities in this area that they would look at the levy too. After all, it would only be fair to relieve honest consumers of that tax in exchange for imposing the other restrictions, wouldn't it?

[cKy]

I dont know much, but I know who I am voting for.

http://www.pirateparty.ca/

[Azure]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

Did you get a response from your MP last time? Just curious, because I did not...

I got the normal 'we are really concerned with your opinion and will take it under consideration when we go to Ottawa' BS.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Oh ye of little faith. It makes sense that if the government is going to adjust the balance of rights and responsibilities in this area that they would look at the levy too. After all, it would only be fair to relieve honest consumers of that tax in exchange for imposing the other restrictions, wouldn't it?

Of course it would be fair. But we're talking about the government, and we're talking about a tax.

Unless there is public demand that the levy be relieved I really wonder if the government will actually do it.

3/4 of the people in Canada probably don't even know there is a levy on that stuff anyways.

[photon]

Originally Posted by fredr123

2. Previous versions of Canadian copyright reform that died on various order papers sought to eliminate the private copying exception. Stands to reason this new version will too.

Didn't the past two versions of this die because an election was called?

If that's the case, the answer here is simple. Overthrow the government again