C-61: Copyright legislation **UPDATE**

[photon]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Photon, have you ever read through the leaked Media Defender emails?

Just some summaries by Arstechnica and others, crazy crazy stuff.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Azure

And what about something like Rapidshare or Megaupload? Both those sites host direct link movies, music, etc, etc....usually illegal content though.

How can you possibly monitor that?

Without access to something in between you and rapidshare (like your ISP, their ISP, etc), or unless your computer or their system is compromised, there's no way they could tell, but who knows, is there anything stopping a media giant from purchasing a major backbone and farming the logs for information for their hunts?

[Bobblehead]

Listening to the radio this morning, the news said something to the effect - "The new copyright bill was passed, and it said you were still allowed to copy your CDs to your iPod".

No mention about if there was and DRM on the CD, the same type of spin the canned emails said.

Previously, the big ISPs all banded together and said they did not want to be the ones to police and report their users. I haven't heard a response from them.
I wonder if we will - Sympatico (Bell), Rogers, Telus all are also Cellphone providers (and Shaw is applying for the new bandwidth space, so they want in the business) - and the were thrown a bone with the provision that makes it illegal to unlock a phone. Can't unlock a phone I have purchased?

And the whole "Record a show but must be watched as soon as convenient"? What sort of BS is that? So if you want to record "Lost" so you can go back and look for clues, you are breaking the law?

If they have no plan to enforce this, whey even introduce the bill? If they were clever, they would not make it a confidence vote, and let the bill be defeated so it can go away for another few years.

[FanIn80]

I'm not sure how accurate this take is on it, but CBC makes it look not so bad...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/who-copyrightlaw

Again, if you're someone who plays within the law (ie: you buy your music, not download it for free), you have even more rights than before.

Still not so happy about the unlocked cell phone bit... but we'll see how that rolls out. It wouldn't be so bad if we had cell phone companies here that we can trust to not take advantage of it... something tells me that now that it's illegal to unlock a phone, Rogers/Bell etc will start charging even more for roaming access.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by photon

Without access to something in between you and rapidshare (like your ISP, their ISP, etc), or unless your computer or their system is compromised, there's no way they could tell, but who knows, is there anything stopping a media giant from purchasing a major backbone and farming the logs for information for their hunts?

This could get good.

Both RS and MU host millions of illegal files. But hey, they should go after the torrent users!

[Azure]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I'm not sure how accurate this take is on it, but CBC makes it look not so bad...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/who-copyrightlaw

Well according to that there is no law that will force my ISP to give up my information. So unless one of the big media companies DOES buy a backbone and starts logging traffic from certain IPs....they can't legally force my ISP to hand over my information.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by photon

Without access to something in between you and rapidshare (like your ISP, their ISP, etc), or unless your computer or their system is compromised, there's no way they could tell, but who knows, is there anything stopping a media giant from purchasing a major backbone and farming the logs for information for their hunts?

sounds like it would be one of those "spend $100 million to make $50 million" moments

[Circa89]

If passed when does this legislation take effect or has it already?

[BlackEleven]

The MPAA is looking to block PVR users from recording movies that are broadcast but net yet released on DVD. They want to release movies on a pay-per-view basis before they're available on DVD, but they'll only make these movies available if they're allowed to block PVRs from recording them. With C61, the restirctions would also be in place in Canada as well.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...me-movies.html

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Circa89

If passed when does this legislation take effect or has it already?

Bill C-61 is not yet law in Canada. The bill was presented for first reading in the House of Commons last Thursday. The bill will not take effect until it passes through three readings in the House and then goes through the Senate as well. Only then will the Governor General give her consent and the bill will become law. The law, however, can come into effect at different times after that.

http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Reference/queens-e.html

[Circa89]

Thanks Fedr, I knew that it wasn't enacted yet but I wanted a time frame to get a few items still. I assume that nothing can be assued illegal if done before the law is passed.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Bill C-61 is not yet law in Canada. The bill was presented for first reading in the House of Commons last Thursday. The bill will not take effect until it passes through three readings in the House and then goes through the Senate as well. Only then will the Governor General give her consent and the bill will become law. The law, however, can come into effect at different times after that.

http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Reference/queens-e.html

I thought it was fast-tracked through to second reading?

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I thought it was fast-tracked through to second reading?

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2...copyright.html

The bill will receive its second reading after Parliament's summer break, which is expected to begin soon. Brison told CBCNews.ca that the Liberals plan to put together amendments to the bill over the summer.

Here's where I hope a political science major stumbles into the thread. I thought that when parliament shut down for the summer it entered prorogation and all the bills on the agenda that weren't passed just died. What the article suggests is that the bill will just sit in limbo over the summer when no committees will be meeting and then it will be re-read in the fall. It's not like the CPC decided to introduce the bill on Thursday and have second reading on Friday or today.

Edit: Prorogation in Canada:

Effect of Prorogation on the House

• The principal effect of ending a session by prorogation is to terminate business.
• Bills under consideration by either the House or the Senate are entirely terminated. The expression “died on the Order Paper” is commonly used to indicate that a bill did not receive Royal Assent.
• In order for Government bills to be revived in the next session, they must be reintroduced as new bills. Bills may be reinstated at the same stage they had reached at the end of the previous session by way of a motion, which is debatable and votable.
• Standing Order 86.1 makes special provisions for reinstating Private Members' Bills at the same stage they had reached in the previous session without requiring a motion. Reinstatement does not apply to motions. Provisional Standing Orders, in force until June 30, 2004, provide that at the beginning of the 3rd Session of the 37th Parliament, all items of Private Members' business will be reinstated.
• Once prorogation has taken place, any document required to be tabled by statute, resolution or standing order must wait to be tabled at the beginning of the new session.
• Orders for the production of papers (including written questions made into orders for return) and requests for government responses to petitions made in the previous session remain in effect.
• Elections for the Assistant Deputy Speaker and the Assistant Deputy Chair of Committees of the Whole take place at the beginning of each new session. The Speaker and Deputy Speaker are elected at the beginning of a new Parliament and continue in office from session to session.

[Thor]

The locked phones part of this gives me extra frustration, being that we should have the choice to pick any phone we choose, then choose our provider based on who we prefer, and then always own the cell number.

What the cell phone companies have done here in Canada is shameful and its truly sad they are able to cement their grip further.

Maybe the I-phone with Rogers will prove a serious point to its competitors that exclusive rights to one provider is not a good deal for them. Here's hoping that all the major cell phone providers suffer big losses of customers over 1 phone, and that they finally learn this system is horrible.

[Bobblehead]

I don't understand why mainstream media all keep saying that if you legally buy music, you are still allowed to make 1 copy?

From the part of the bill Fredr123 posted:

29.22 (1) It is not an infringement of copyright for an individual to reproduce onto a medium or device a musical work embodied in a sound recording, a performer’s performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or a sound recording in which a musical work or a performer’s performance of a musical work is embodied, or any substantial part of such a work or other subject-matter, if the following conditions are met:

<snip (a)&(b)>

(c) the individual, in order to make the reproduction, did not circumvent a technological measure or cause one to be circumvented, within the meanings of the definitions “circumvent” and “technological measure” in section 41;

[Azure]

Better download all the illegal music you want while you still can!

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I don't understand why mainstream media all keep saying that if you legally buy music, you are still allowed to make 1 copy?

From the part of the bill Fredr123 posted:

Because they only read the spin email sent out by the PCs and did not bother to fact check it. Just your typical lazy mainstream media stuff.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Azure

Better download all the illegal music you want while you still can!

As mentioned, if you own a copy protected CD, it will be cheaper to download a copy ($500 fine) than rip it to your iPod ($20000 fine).

[Lithium]

Great now all those non-seeders on BitTorrent have an excuse.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

As mentioned, if you own a copy protected CD, it will be cheaper to download a copy ($500 fine) than rip it to your iPod ($20000 fine).

Are they going to do random iPod checks? Or do you have to be sharing the CD to get in crap for it?