News

Video Surfaces of Moore’s “Radical Extremists” Comment

Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore's "radical extremists" comment yesterday generated considerable attention, though he privately denied saying it in some correspondence (one DM: "Not what I said. Not even close").  New video has now been posted that confirms the comment and further attacks on those supporting fair copyright.  The latest comments:

With regard to the legislation, we really did try to strike a balance with this legislation. You'll notice, I think, we're now three weeks into the public consideration of the legislation that we tabled.  There is a lot of commentary out there on this online and I think the response that we're getting is that that generally is the case.  The only people who are opposed to this legislation are really two groups of radical extremists.  In the continuum of political ideaology, if you go really extreme to the right or really extreme to the left it actually swings back around.  That is sort of where we are.

There are those that pretend to be for copyright reform.  But they don't believe in actual copyright reform.  There are those that are cited as experts by the media endlessly who are not in favour of copyright reform.  They favour only weakening legislation, only in gutting tools that would allow those who are actually investing in jobs to have those jobs.  I think we give them far too much voice.  If you look at the balance, anyone who is truly objective, looks at this legislation will realize that everyone has a little water in their wine with this legislation because it requires that kind of balance. When we started off our copyright proposal, the Prime Minister said, he was a staffer back in the 1980s in Brian Mulroney's government, he said since then until now this has been an ongoing issue.  Good luck with that. Because there are people with such divergent interests.  With this legislation, if you do not have an absolutist view, if you are open minded, if you want to ensure that the whole of Canada and the greater economy can move forward you can strike the right balance and I think this legislation does that.

But don't let those some of them are out there, who as I say are cited endlessly by the media, who pretend to be experts on copyright reform, who put up a smiley, shiny, cute face on what is actually a pretty disingenuous campaign to undermine the rights, the property rights of individual citizens,  to invest in their creative goods.  That is what a lot of people do.  We can't listen to those voices. If they do speak up, we need to confront them.

39 Comments

  1. Deny it.. deny it.. deny it… typical politician.

    Then the video appears and he’ll give some lame ass apology.. I say boot the moron from office.

  2. Ugh..
    “The only people who are opposed to this legislation are really two groups of radical extremists.”

    Well that pretty much seals the deal as to who he’s labelling as radical extremists… So very sad having people that can’t recognize balanced solutions “lead the way”

    Voting soon yet? I’ve never been itching to get to the voting booths like this before.

  3. Chris Brand says:

    property rights
    “campaign to undermine the rights, the property rights of individual citizens”. There certainly is one of those, but it’s coming from the intermediaries and is embodied in the TPM provisions of C-32.
    Never before has there been a proposal that copyright should give rightsholders the ability to decide how, where, and when I access the copies I bought from them. I bought DVDs in Europe and a DVD player in Canada. C-32 would take away my right to watch my DVDs in my DVd player, and apparently my opposition to that is part of an “attempt to undermine [...] the property rights of individual citizens” ? Amazing.

  4. This is typical for the Conservative government
    They do the same thing with crime legislation the experts say is bad. They do the same thing on climate change. Back in logic class this was called an ad hominem attack. But it works for their base. They have given up expanding in Quebec and now are courting the religious types, who are not use to questioning authority. They feel they can say anything.

  5. Quid Pro Quo?
    Wow…he’s drinking some serious lobbyist kool-aid…either unwittingly or somehow paid to do so but he’s definitely drinking it!!

  6. Pssst….Michael…. I think he’s talking about you….he’s very subtle that way

  7. Don’t stoop to Mr. Moore’s tactics
    @Dave “They have given up expanding in Quebec and now are courting the religious types, who are not use to questioning authority.”

    Umm … I’m a ‘religious’ type Dave and am opposed to and a vocal opponent of the TPM provisions of C-32. Mr. Moore is painting his critics with a broad brush, better rethink that comment.

  8. @ Crockett

    I thin Dave was more referring to those religious zealots than everyone that is religious. The zeal after all are very much sheeple… though not everyone that is religious is w/o the ability to think for themselves of course.

  9. Expert?
    So how much more of an “expert on copyright reform” is James Moore compared to Mr Geist?

    Capcha: New ebenezer

  10. I’m pissed off. Not so much about the proposed changes in C-32 but the fact that an elected official can lie to the public and get off so easy. He labels everyone that doesn’t support the DRM provisions a radical extremist, denies that he said it, gets caught lying, then is applauded. Does he realize that 90% of the population is not getting represented or is he counting on it?

  11. technical, non-sensical, fear-mongering reasons says:

    technical, non-sensical, fear-mongering reasons
    @Mart I’m sure all those poli sci classes the Moore took make him a real expert in Copyright and Software Development of Technical Protection Mechanisms. The fact is these guys are not experts they are ministers who don’t have this expertise and should defer to professionals in Canada.

    “The only people who are opposed to this legislation are really two groups of radical extremists.”

    So anyone who speaks out is an extremist. That’s pretty clear.

    It’s also sad that he’s come out as dishonest, he’s painted Michael Geist with the same brush as ACTRA and the librarians and even the dreaded Pirate Party who we obviously shouldn’t worry about since they are now in our boat.

  12. Open minded? Really?
    @Mr. Moore “With this legislation, if you do not have an absolutist view, if you are open minded, if you want to ensure that the whole of Canada and the greater economy can move forward you can strike the right balance and I think this legislation does that.”

    I would not say that Mr. Moore is the best person to be citing the characteristic of open mindness. The lion’s share of people in support of TPM are the media moguls who want to override and monetize the fair use provisions in the very same bill they are offered. It is not even logical, never mind open minded.

    To purposely re-quote Mr. Moore, “a pretty disingenuous campaign to undermine the rights, the property rights of individual citizens” > “a pretty disingenuous campaign to undermine the rights, the FAIR USE RIGHTS of individual citizens” is more accurate.

    Not all people are so easily fooled (not even the religious ones 0_o). Say black is white all you want it won’t make it so.

  13. He says “the only people opposed to this legislation”. Judging from Prof. Geists comments on the bill so far (before this), I wouldn’t have put him in that category any more than all the opposition parties who are supportive of the Bill, but seeking changes to the digital locks provision.

    Unless you combine it with with the other video, where he was saying anyone who “proposes specific ammendments” are really against copyright reform altogether.

  14. “who pretend to be experts on copyright reform”
    “who pretend to be experts on copyright reform” true enough, he pretends as well but what is more serious here is the plea to authority he is making.

    Only copyright experts may participate, and he seems to be picking and choosing who’s an expert for instance if you read Barry Sookman’s blog you see that Michael Geist is not a copyright expert.

    What’s more interesting is when you combine this with that software developer comment:
    “technical, non-sensical, fear-mongering reasons”
    You see he rejects the expertise of software developers.

    What Moore doesn’t seem to understand is that software practitioners are gravely affected by TPM provisions as these are rules about software and he doesn’t seem to have the same background to understand the dangers of TPM enforcement. He then explicitly DENIES expert knowledge and rejects it, he won’t listen to it because it is TECHNICAL?

    Well if you won’t listen to technical criticisms then why are you pushing a bill that legislates TECHNICAL Protection Mechanisms?

  15. Again, not really surprised. It’s a tactic that the Conservatives have used since they got into power.

    But I echo the comments above on how the “experts” he believes are not really experts at all, and tends to ignore the actual experts (and consumers) are kind of amusing and sad. It’s pretty obvious that the bill was made in this way to make the American’s happy.

  16. Balanced?
    Time for a score cars reality check.

    A-Media Industry: Concerned with profits above all else at the expense of user rights. (There are some innovators and honest artists out there)
    B-Consumer: Concerned with getting value for their money and not being taken advantage of. (Yes there are those who want it for free, but not the majority)

    OK, now who is jumping up and down in support of this bill [A] and who is questioning the logic of it [B].

    I ask, how is this then a balanced bill?

  17. Dr. Strangelove says:
  18. Brent Knowles says:

    Very disapointed
    The issue of the bill itself aside I am very displeased that an elected official is using his power and position to demonize a segment of the Canadian population simply because they disagree with what he is proposing. Discussion and citizen involvement on issues needs to be encouraged.

  19. @Chris
    Who are the “actual” experts? It’s not like there is a certain criteria to meet. When you are discussing various people who spent significant time working in a particular area, it is pretty tough to make claims about which ones are “actual experts”

  20. “When we started off our copyright proposal, the Prime Minister said, he was a staffer back in the 1980s in Brian Mulroney’s government, he said since then until now this has been an ongoing issue. Good luck with that.”

    No, James. We know what he really said: “We don’t care what you do, as long as the U.S. is satisfied.”

  21. @crade – True. But I’ll take the media experts over Moore’s experts.

  22. MORE restrictive
    I think Bill C-32 should actually be MORE restrictive for consumers, because the sooner we have draconian technology laws that no one follows (and the injustices that ensue), the sooner we as a whole society can learn that the fundemental rights and freedoms that were put in the Charter are there for a damned good reason, and should absolutely be extended into our digital lives.

  23. Anonymous says:

    I had been previously endeavoring to give the man the benefit of the doubt that he might be referring to a group of highly vocal people that oppose this bill which are given a lot of press but lack credibility.

    However, “The only people who are opposed to this legislation are really two groups of radical extremists” pretty much seals that notion up. I was wrong.

    All sorts of slander issues aside…. It’s worth noting that this is little more than argumentum ad-homimem, discounting the opinions of the people who disagree with him rather than actually refuting their specific positions, and such arguments are generally only employed by people who have run out of more rational things they could say to directly refute the position of the people they believe are mistaken.

  24. In summary
    We have the only possible answer
    Dismiss everyone else
    Assign a negative label to them
    Disregard
    Don’t listen
    Tell everyone else to ignore
    Tell everyone to tell their friends to ignore
    Vote PC

  25. They’re not “PC”
    They’re New Conservatives, no matter that they don’t bill themselves as such.

  26. hmmm
    According to wikipedia…definition of fascism:
    “Fascists seek to organize a nation on corporatist perspectives, values, and systems such as the political system and the economy.”

    According to wikipedia…definition of Idiot:
    “An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way.”

    So, does this make Moore a “Fascist Idiot”?

  27. IamME, your post is derogatory but it is descriptive of Mr. Moore’s behavior recently. The man needs an education & a PR makeover.

  28. @ Crockett
    No more derogatory than calling half the country “Radical extremists” which, these days generally seems to imply terrorists.

  29. Did he mention experts? What about the experts who regularly represented the RIAA in their lawsuits against thieving children and grandmothers?

  30. Anonymous says:

    What Moore simply fails to realize, for whatever reason, is that the provisions in C32 are *NOT REQUIRED* for the international treaties that Canada has obligation to. Some provision for legally protecting digital locks that preserves copyright holder interests is required, but that can be wholly satisfied by making circumvention of such protections criminal only when actual copyright infringement occurs, even without considering circumvention to be criminal or copyright infringement a priori.

  31. Anonymous said:

    What Moore simply fails to realize,

    Actually given the insidious nature of the BS with C32 it would be perfectly inline to make us “ACTA” compliant assuming those “in charge” actually get that pile of shit forced into being.

    The combo of c32 and ACTA.. both very very very flawed is beyond insane IMO… and we really do need to lynch those aholes screwing the entire country over for their own pocketbooks.
    (Of which I bet we all agree they are being paid to do)

  32. “The *ONLY* people who are opposed to this legislation are really two groups of radical extremists” [emphasis mine].

    I too had thought he might be only referring to some section of the population that simply did not have any political credibility, but I can’t help but find this statement outright slanderous.

    Who do I write to or call to complain about this? I’m not too keen on being lumped in with the same sorts of people that fly airplanes into buildings.

  33. It’s not about the artists, it’s about monopolies
    If it’s all about the artists as they pretend, I’ll take any DMCA provision if the law is amended to say that the copyright belongs to the artist/creator and cannot be transferred to any other party. Ever. And the owner can just “license” a third party to distribute copies, with the maximum license period of 1 year at a time. And that any attempt to coerce the artist/creator to license it for more than 1 year is punishable by 25 years prison and a fine going up to 1 billion dollars.

    Then I would say that it’s the artist indeed that’s protected. And I’d love to see the yearly negotiations between the recording labels and the artists.

    Nap.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Wow… its almost surreal to see such blatant hypocrisy.

    Moore has, in the past, summarily ignored people on Twitter and the like who have expressed any opposition to this bill via that medium, and yet in his video he *CLEARLY* tells people to not ignore the voices of such critics. Or did he just mean only don’t ignore them until at least you’ve told them they are wrong, after that it’s okay? Although that’s still, by my reckoning, ignoring them.

    Clearly, the opposition’s opinions don’t matter to him, but rather than counter any specific concerns he just covers it all with a blanket label of “they’re wrong” and shuts the door to any further negotiation on that front.

    And he thinks people who oppose this bill are close-minded absolutists?

    Wow… just… wow.

  35. Laurel L. Russwurm says:

    A failure of communication between mouth and brain?
    “DM: “Not what I said. Not even close”

  36. Laurel L. Russwurm said:
    A failure of communication between mouth and brain?
    “DM: “Not what I said. Not even close”

    He has a brain? Sure as hell doesn’t seem like it.

  37. Aaron Walkhouse says:

    Property rights?
    Now we know who the extremist is. Copyright, trademark and patent
    law both confers and limits rights over the use of information but
    it does not turn those rights or that information into property.

    A child could understand that.

    If this character doesn’t get something as simple as this, he really
    does not belong in any part of this process and should be dismissed
    before he becomes an embarrassment to his leader and his country.

  38. Positive note
    Many of you are not seeing the positives of this. Moore’s drivels will only alienate voters from himself, and/or his party, so this can only be positive. It’s funny the people clapping in the background are getting their money’s worth. Those backroom deals sure pay off.

    hahahaha