As Industry Minister Tony Clement and Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore continue to work on a copyright reform package, it is worth reviewing comments from both Ministers over the past year about C-61, copyright reform, and innovation. The vision presented is that the world has changed since C-61, Canada has flexibility in how it implements digital reforms, and that technology and the Internet should be embraced as a great opportunity.
Clement on C-61 in July 2009 at the Calgary roundtable:
"C-61 doesn't exist anymore, it obviously died with the last Parliament, and if you think that there are other ways that we should frame new legislation, by all means please bring that to our attention as well. Don't feel constrained by the formulation in C-61. James and I are of the view that already some aspects of that Bill are out of date such as the movement of technology."
Moore on the lack of consultation with C-61 in August 2009 at the Montreal town hall:
"Often politicians in the past, we know that around Bill C-61, the, I think the principal concern that people outlined with C-61 is that there wasn't enough consultation, that that legislation came forward and that people didn't have a chance to speak in the front end of the legislation before the cabinet had an opportunity to discuss and develop the legislation and that's what we're doing here."
Clement in July 2009 on change since C-61 at the Vancouver roundtable:
"It's no surprise I'm sure to people who've been following this issue that things have changed a great deal since that original piece of copyright legislation was passed by a previous parliament, and indeed things have changed since the last attempt at copyright reform occurred a year ago under Bill C-61."
Moore at the Digital Economy conference in June 2009:
"The old way of doing things is over. These things are all now one. And it's great. And it's never been better. And we need to be enthusiastic and embrace these things. I point out the average age of a member of parliament because don't assume that those who are making the decisions and who are driving the debate understand all the dynamics that are at play here. Don't assume that everybody understands the opportunities that are at play here and how great this can be for Canada. Tony is doing his job and I'm going to do my job and be a cheerleader and push this and to fight for the right balance as we go forward. The opportunities are unbelievable and unparalleled in human history."
Clement on the commitment to copyright reform following the Speech from the Throne in March 2010:
"I’ve been pretty clear to the Americans and in my public statements that we are moving ahead with copyright reform. The key is, from the American perspective, they want us to be part of WIPO, which is an international treaty on protecting intellectual property. We don’t have a problem with that, but we’re going to do it in a made-in-Canada way. We’re not just going to take what the Americans are doing or what the Europeans are doing. We are going to fit it to the Canadian context and I think that is the right thing to do."
Moore on time shifting in March 2009:
"New media isn't frankly new media anymore. I watch more television on my iPod than I do on an actual conventional television set or through my PVR. I think if you ask the average Canadian under the age of 20 how do they consume their media, you'll hear a very different story than you'll hear from Canadians over the age of 40."
April fools?
Hmmm… 🙂
protection association of private domain name owners
Privatisation et nationalisation des termes géographiques dans la zone .FR
De nombreux ayant droits utilisateurs de services numériques liés à un nom de domaine géographique en .fr se sont regroupés en association (APDUI) ; Ils s’estiment spoliés par la procédure PREDEC sur la base d’un décret manifestement rétroactif au nom de l’interet personnel de barons locaux à la tete de collectivités régionales, sous le fallacieux prétexte d’interet général..
Dans le cadre de l’Affaire Sunshine, l’avocat général de la cour de cassation a, pour sa part, justifié la rétroactivité du décret comme un sujet majeur d’interet national.
Il est vrai que décision de la perte du droit au nom mise en place par l’Afnic en 2004, en accord avec l’Association des Maires de France et sous l’égide des différents ministères représentés au CA de l’Afnic était déjà à l’époque d’interet général, dans le cadre du plan RESO 2003-2007 du 1e ministre Raffarin
Ainsi, on considérait à l’époque que les restrictions dans la zone .FR étaient un frein au développement de l’Internet en France.
Les gouvernants ont « privatisé » le .FR en 2004 sur la base d’une compétition 1er arrivé-1er servi pour ensuite ‘nationaliser’ par décret en 2007 et sans indemnité, au mépris des règles fondamentales.
Mais que vaut donc la signature de l’Etat Français sur les marchés financiers lorsque cet état renie sa parole et ne respecte pas les droits de ses citoyens ?
PS : rappel historique du programme du parti Nazi en 1920 :
“Nous exigeons une réforme agraire adaptée à nos besoins nationaux, la promulgation d’une loi permettant l’expropriation, sans indemnité, de terrains à des fins d’utilité publique”
protectyion association
Le predec, une procédure totalitaire mise en place par et pour les gouvernants
Outil juridique d’expropriation et de harcèlement financier à moindre cout ( 250€ ) le predec est une procédure inéquitable, qui ne respecte pas les droits des défendeurs et dont le mode de jugement est gardé secret (cada 2009).
Expropriation sur la base de décret et d’aval arcep contestés, décisions administratives orchestrées par un cabinet d’avocat commun a l’afnic et au ministère, décisions rétroactives au nom de l’interet particulier de barons locaux, simulacre de consultation publique, interprétations partiales et subjectives (lrar à 15 jours date reception faisant foi), harcelement et mauvaise foi des politiques et des élus locaux, prise en otage du personnel de l’Afnic imposé juge et partie, menace de perte de compétence (appel d’offre organisé communément par l’afnic et le ministère), utilisation du cadre législatif pour intimider pénalement des propriétaires de noms de domaine, sites et adresses email internet (No 3726 2007), telles sont les méthodes employées par les gouvernants français dans la zone FR.
Mr le député Myard sera ravi, lui qui revendique un modèle chinois de controle pour le .FR , zone internet clé impérative pour l’organisation des jeux de paris en ligne ou hadopi,
Bernard Dulac
APDUI
Association pour la Protection des Droits des Utilisateurs de l’Internet
http://apdui.fr
grunt
nothing quite like a conviced, three time rapist asking for/ promising more and better, is there?
think of the children already. Repo (duction) is NOT for profit… usually.
who do these guys hand with, anyway?
pat
Promising
I think these guys *get it* on a certain level. But, in the end it still comes down to how much they cave to pressure from industry over consumers. We need to have a balance, but I think it should be tilted more towards openness and consumer rights than industry locks and control.
Hope
You know, reading those comments is actually giving me hope. Funny how carefull selection of comments can make anybody look good.
I hope that you’re right Micheal and that things are on the upswing.