News

Balanced Copyright for Canada Board and Funding Revealed

After several weeks of delays, the Balanced Copyright for Canada site revealed its funding and advisory board late on Tuesday night, hours before the Canada Day holiday.  The primary source of funding is not a surprise – as I suggested in my first post on the site – this is a Canadian Recording Industry Association production.  As the public questions about the site mounted, the regular response was that this was an effort of "employees, unions, artists and creators" and that the all-Canadian Advisory Board would be announced soon.  The fact that the site was really a CRIA attempt to create "grassroots" support for C-32 was not acknowledged.

The composition of the advisory board is interesting.  First, of the 13 members, more than half are either record company executives, former record company executives, or lawyers who represent record companies.  No surprise given the site's backing, but not exactly the promised "employees, unions, artists and creators."  In fact, it is notable that there are very few prominent creators and not many representatives from creator groups outside the music industry such as authors, performers, directors, or artists.  In fact, despite an earlier claim that Loreena McKennitt would be on the advisory board, those plans apparently changed.

Why so few creators?  Quite simply, CRIA's interests are not closely aligned with many other creator groups.  ACTRA and AFM Canada quickly distanced themselves from the effort and most other musicians have been focused on the private copying levy, not digital locks.  Moreover, the site briefly hosted a "consumer letter" that fully supported extending fair dealing to education, a move strongly opposed by some copyright collectives and authors' groups.

The other notable aspect of the advisory board is the inclusion of lawyer Richard Owens.  Three months ago, Owens had the following to say about the use of form letters in the public policy process in an effort to call into question thousands of submissions from Canadians:

Form letters are useful to some degree, but they are hardly the outpourings of hearts and minds filled by circumspect contemplation of the minutiae of copyright law. The thought and effort required to send a form letter is minimal.  A form letter can be sent from a position of complete ignorance so long as it seems to further some vague objective for the sender, such as the desire for free stuff, or to feed a sense of belonging to a community. It simply cannot be argued that form letters should be given equal weight and space with original, thoughtful Submissions.  To do so would be to fail to make the most basic qualitative distinction amongst evidence at hand, and qualitative distinctions are far more important in areas of policy than mere quantity. It is ironic that so many people opted to make themselves heard about original works, with an appropriated “cut and paste” form letter.

What is really ironic is that Owens now finds himself on an advisory board of a site that not only requires sending a form letter to a local MP in order to fully participate in its activities, but will not even permit any edits to the letter itself (unlike the form letter service Owens criticized).  Moreover, Owens warned against "gaming" the copyright consultation and argued that "online social networks can damage, rather than enhance, Canadian participative democracy."  Yet here is a site that has accepted U.S. record company executives (who presumably were required to game the system by sending letters to MPs) and actively encourages using social networks to distort online discussions with suggested talking points on blog posts and other commentary.

51 Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    Spam campaign misses the point
    The balancedcopyright.ca website directs members to spam the comment sections of blogs and newspapers, something that has borne fruit on this very site. I expect this comment to be drowned out by a hundred praising C32.

    Unfortunately for them, this will achieve nothing of value. The fight to amend the anti-circumvention provisions will be not be won or lost in the comment sections this blog. ;-)

  2. Garbage Board with a Garbage Site!
    ’nuff said.

  3. *rolls eyes*
    It’s one thing to set up such a movement… it’s another ENTIRELY to hide who you are and what your motivations are, trying to pass them off as something you’re not.

    Underhanded efforts like these should not be tolerated.

  4. you can call me mr.
    you’d think there would be laws against this sort of fraudulent misrepresentation…

    captcha: befuddle of

  5. Joe Smith says:

    Dev
    Slime ball tactics from slime ball people, who are trying to get slime ball legislation through.

  6. Astroturfing like this is simply despicable (said like Daffy Duck for emphasis). I really dislike it when a group such as these charlatans use the Internet for ill-gotten gain. In this case public exposure is certainly in the public good.

  7. Nice to see such mature, tolerant comments here, especially hurling insults (“slime ball” “charlatans”). I see nothing wrong with an industry taking action like this. And the music biz in Canada is actually quite small – even if you add up all the staff of all the companies concerned, it’s still pretty small.. There’s probably more people using this website!

  8. Snake Oil
    RWB, You call a spade a spade. It’s all about those with money wanting more and using any tactic they can to bleed it from the public.

    Wikipedia = “A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to OBTAIN MONEY, fame or other advantages VIA SOME PRETENSE OR DECEPTION.”

    Bill C-32 ‘gives’ fair use rights to the consumer but includes a non-circumventable digital lock clause which lets the content industry negate those same rights. Yet, this bill is being sold a good for consumers. When asked about the digital lock issue the question is either ignored or skirted by those promoting this legislation (Yes, that includes you Minister Moore).

    Pretense = CHECK
    Deception = CHECK

    This guy ain’t buying your snake oil.

  9. Crockett says:

    The Truth is never a waste of time
    @Anonymous “The fight to amend the anti-circumvention provisions will be not be won or lost in the comment sections this blog. ;-)”

    I tend to disagree, while we are almost certainly preaching to the crowd, lies and deceit must always be countered.

    Minister Moore’s recent triad against his critics has been seen by many as frustration at the effectiveness of fair rights advocates who are shining light on the logical disconnect of his legislation.

  10. Crockett says:

    Shameless plug for Parody
    In the spirit of the above post please see my parody video of Minister James recent triad.

  11. mckracken says:

    @rwb
    Nice to see such mature, tolerant comments here, especially hurling insults (“slime ball” “charlatans”).

    ……

    as opposed to ‘radical extremist’ and all other commentary regarding high seas piracy? when i take up a sword, set a parrot on my shoulder and set sail, then you can call me ‘scum sucking pirate’.

    get your head out of your a$$.

  12. @rwb
    …”Nice to see such mature, tolerant comments here, especially hurling insults (“slime ball” “charlatans”).”

    Welcome to the world of unmoderated postings. Something you will never see on any of the sites advocating more stringent copyright enforcement, or that laws like C-32 be accepted as is.

    You might consider it a benefit to have comments “moderated” to eliminate such expression, but whenever this happens it is also condoning censorship. You will never, ever, get a true picture of sentiment or ideals when comments are being censored.

    If you really want to get an idea of the real world, you cannot filter it through moderation. Nor can you expect a united, commonly worded set of ideals. You have to accept that you will get strongly worded comments. The trick is to pay attention to the ideas and content, not the way it is expressed.

    Welcome to the real world. Rough and tumble. Develop a thick skin, but not so thick that you fail to hear the message.

  13. kellythedog says:

    There is just something abut a board that asks for comments , but then never actually posts any, that just makes me sad.
    I even signed up for an account on the board, made a comment, saw it would be moderated, then…nothing.

  14. Laurel L. Russwurm says:

    #fixC32
    If copyright is to benefit creators why do record company execs and lawyers control so much copyright? They certainly aren’t creators.

    (Unless you count creating “Balanced Copyright for Canada”)

    Since when do governments protect obsolete industry jobs? Things have changed; the business model has changed. Because the CRIA companies are striving to legislate anti-progress instead of adapting to the new market conditions, there are new companies starting up that will provide the services that the Independent recording artists need.

    The really clever record company employees won’t follow their lemming-like bosses into the sea, but will instead use their expertise to set up their own companies and offer the services Indie musicians actually need.

    Record company employees can certainly have an opinion, but a single record company employee opinion should not carry any more weight than a single consumer opinion. Bill C-32′s digital lock supremacy clearly caters to CRIA (and RIAA/MPAA), indicating that our minority government is putting foreign interests above those of Canadian consumers.

    @crockett
    Just when you think every possible Downfall Parody has been done… You could start an @fakejamesmoore persona on Twitter (fyi I dented it on Identi.ca/tweeted it on Twitter)

    @kellythedog they call that false advertising

  15. RenderMe says:

    @crockett that was entertaining. Thank you for the link. I think it would be funny if Moores radical extremist comment was synced up to circus/slapstick music. The Jules Winnfield treatment might be deserved again, especially since the NMPA (National Assoc of Music Publishers) made the same “radical extremist” comment when referring to the EFF, Creative Commons and Public Knowledge. http://bit.ly/ajGmDG

    As for this astroturf group, they’re free to create and organize anyway they want. I doubt many Canadians will buy into it; might be worth the try. How long until we’ll be hearing Minister Moore using this astroturf group as an example of “consumer” support just like the chamber of commerce.

  16. James Moore Parody – THE SEQUEL
    Hey everyone, I just want to point out the reason I am making these parody videos is to show the logical disconnect of Mr. Moore’s policies. Possibly to even get people, including Mr. Moore, to think through them again.

    Now for the sequel, the funny thing for this clip I hardly had to change the dialog at all. Enjoy!

    @#fixC32 I don’t use twitter but I did set up a fake blog .. http://www.fakejamesmoore.blogspot.com

  17. “The balancedcopyright.ca website directs members to spam the comment sections of blogs and newspapers, something that has borne fruit on this very site. I expect this comment to be drowned out by a hundred praising C32.” (Anonymous)

    That site does not have any followers. It’s purpose is to create an impression of support where there is none. Just go there and take a look at the long strip of “no comments”. If anyone from there spams comments, it has to be one of the people running it.

  18. Sleaze beyond the next level
    > Nice to see such mature, tolerant comments here, especially hurling insults (“slime ball” “charlatans”). I see nothing wrong with an industry taking action like this. And the music biz in Canada is actually quite small – even if you add up all the staff of all the companies concerned, it’s still pretty small..

    Nice to see RWB trying to defend the indefensible once again, except you totally fail it this time. As quoted by Michael Geist on Richard Owens’ stance on form letters above, the industry sets a moral standard for everyone else, but acting beyond the opposite moral standard instead. The industry wants quality letters from knowledgeable individuals and frowns upon sleazy cookie-cutter letters; however, the industry takes cookie-cutting letters to the next level of sleaze by making it mandatory and uneditable.

    Then, you, RWB, come here and say there’s nothing wrong with the next level of sleaze, which to me means your sleaze is beyond the next level of sleaze the site is using. Let’s recap according to Richard Owens’ sleaze test:

    1: “outpourings of hearts and minds filled by circumspect contemplation of the minutiae of copyright law.”

    0: “The thought and effort required to send a form letter is minimal.”

    -1: balancedcopyrightforcanada.ca, ‘appropriated “cut and paste” form letter’ without the ability to edit.

    -2: RWB, “I see nothing wrong with an industry taking action like this.”

    > There’s probably more people using this website!

    Like who?
    The opposition parties, Liberals, NDP, Block, Green, Pirate?
    Canadian Consumer Initiative?
    Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada?
    Canadian Association of University Teachers?
    Canadian Federation of Students?
    Canadian Library Association?
    Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright?
    Retail Council of Canada?
    Canadian Bookseller Association?
    Documentary Organization of Canada?

    Like Astroturfers who fake grassroots support to falsify public opinions.

    hahahahaha

  19. Votes are useful to some degree, but they are hardly the outpourings of hearts and minds filled by circumspect contemplation of the minutiae of politics. The thought and effort required to cast a vote is minimal. A vote can be sent from a position of complete ignorance so long as it seems to further some vague objective for the sender, such as the desire for free stuff, or to feed a sense of belonging to a community. It simply cannot be argued that votes should be given equal weight and space with original, thoughtful Submissions. To do so would be to fail to make the most basic qualitative distinction amongst evidence at hand, and qualitative distinctions are far more important in areas of policy than mere quantity. It is ironic that so many people opted to make themselves heard about original works, with an appropriated “cut and paste” vote.

  20. These CRIA people should be ashamed for trying to subvert democracy. I can only hope a law is passed where commercial interests can be punished severely for trying to interfere with the public will, including jail time.

    We had this discussion about this Copyright legislation last Summer and the Canadian people loudly said NO to it. Begone now!

    And, do you CRIA cronies even realize what you are advocating? If this law is passed, we are on the first step to losing our right to privacy, our right to information, and steady destruction of our democracy.

    Get a real job instead of playing this cloak and dagger game with the public. Shameful!

  21. @maebnoom
    ..”qualitative distinctions are far more important in areas of policy than mere quantity”

    Interesting idea. Perhaps each bill tabled in Parliament should be accompanied by a longer brief that shows the thinking and “qualitative distinctions” that went into making up the bill? That way anybody can understand the reasons for the way it is put together, and see how the bill measures up to the objectives.

    Instead we are left to divine these “qualitative distinctions” from the words in the bill itself. I would certainly like to see such a brief on C-32.

    It would certainly change the scope and focus of public discussion around bills like this.

  22. phillipsjk says:

    Good idea, but you are opening a big can of worms
    I tried writing a short bill for model parlialment once: it is so much like computer programming, it is scary. You have:

    - Comments (Whereas clauses)
    - It is interpreted using formal logic ( the courts)
    - Each piece of ‘logic’ can reference other pieces in other Acts, leading to unexpected consequences if the drafter is not careful.

    If that is not bad enough:
    - no compiler or formal logic checker. This is what committees and the Senate are supposed to handle.
    - Case-law informs the interpretation of the law
    - Common-law informs the interpretation of the law (is that the same thing?)

    I have already said elsewhere that the computer industry won’t be mature until software is routinely checked, using a formal mathematical proofs, for errors.

    In law, formal proof is not as important since the police and Judges can use discretion. However, the similarity suggests that complex, contradictory laws should be avoided whenever possible.

  23. Reeve Wilkie says:

    Regardless of C-32, or any new copyright law for that matter, I still fail to see how any of it would be enforceable unless unchecked monitoring of internet feeds happened.

  24. phillipsjk says:

    @Reeve Wikie
    Your video playback device would implement some kind of “traitor tracing” scheme like adding a unique water mark. Devices that fail to implement “traitor tracing” are considered “circumvention devices” and mere possession is against the law unless you have a lawful excuse itemized in the bill. Infringing the copyright on any work may jeopardize your circumvention device permit.

    Or, the bill may do nothing with respect to TPMs because there is no such thing as an “effective Technological measure.” One of the major problems with the bill is that it may have anything ranging from: no effect; to ending society as we know it by driving most manufacturing, film, news, and software production overseas. It all depends on the interpretation by the courts. Most likely it will be something in between: only general-purpose computers will be outlawed without a permit. So processes not using computer control may be safe.

  25. Crockett says:

    Optimistically hopeful for the future.
    @phillipsjk “Most likely it will be something in between: only general-purpose computers will be outlawed without a permit.

    I really don’t see that happening. I predict this whole lock down attempt by the media industries will get somewhat worse then, as more people realize what is trying to be done to them and their rights, there will be a backlash. By then there will be new players in the market who are willing to work with technology rather than against it. I see the big media distributors as a dying and cornered animal, fighting ferociously to the end.

    The question will be how long will this all take? Part of the problem is the current ‘old boys’ club are really OLD boys and do not get the new social/technology thing. My father, for instance, never could program a VCR. As the next generation moves I see a change in the air. Not too soon enough for me!

  26. Anonymous says:

    Tony Clement is older than James Moore.
    “Part of the problem is the current ‘old boys’ club are really OLD boys and do not get the new social/technology thing.”

    Tony Clement is older than James Moore. In fact, Moore was touted my the MSM as a young, tech-savvy (he can use Twitter!!!) MP, who would be the voice of reason on the copyright bill.

    Bono, Cameron, Harper, Obama and Szarkozy aren’t exactly what I’d call “old boys” either.

  27. Tony Clement is older than James Moore.
    And I’m older than either one of them. My father is over 80, and he understands and appreciates the technology and the issues.

    It’s not simply an age issue, it’s an understanding issue. It is cutting across all kinds of demographics.

  28. phillipsjk says:

    @crockett been wanting to use this “matrix” reference for a while:
    “What good is a phone Call Mr. Anderson, if you can’t speak?….”

    They are already phasing out general-purpose computers. If your computer is running Windows Vista, 7, or iPhone OS, it is more accurately described as a “computing console.” This is because DRM is built into the hardware and software. the “Fat” PS3 had its computing functionality (“Other OS”) revoked with a firmware update after a single hacker was able to get too much access to the hardware (not even breaking the DRM; just the hypervisor).

    BTW, I don’t think these “circumvention permits” will be government sanctioned. They will be administered by the Licensing consortia involved. When you inform them you want to study the DRM, the will say “no need, we can grant you a circumvention permit.” They will likely sue people who say “I don’t need no permit!!!” just to make an example out of them. I foresee the circumvention permits will being used as a “bright line” to distinguish between “general-purpose computers” and “circumvention devices.” If you are found to have infringed copyright, your permit can be revoked, converting your “general-purpose computer” into a “circumvention device.” Somebody with a revoked permit would be forced either to sell their computer, or convert it to a “computing console” by installing Windows or MacOS. Using a “general-purpose” computer would become a privilege, not a right, much like driving.

    I just hope I am not giving them ideas they haven’t thought of yet :P

  29. @Anonymous “Tony Clement is older than James Moore.”

    I am aware that James Moore is rather young (see my parody videos), but I was more referring to the media execs stuck in the glory of their high profits past.

  30. Going to secretive, often international , conferences is a principle activity of the global Copyright collection industry and the construction of Phantom ‘artist’ unrepresentative organisations is a favorite pastime of the industry. Gaining A Monopoly over the representation of artists is always their hope. Managers who self describe as ‘artists’ are a world wide phenomena in the copyright collection industry and equating ‘truth’ to self-interest is a world wide phenomena in this industry.

  31. @phillipsjk
    What you are talking about is almost what we have today, minus the “licensing” of general purpose computers. Region coding on DVDs is the simplest example. The “thinking” back then was that very few people would bother to bypass the DVD player region coding limitations, and for the most part they were right. Then along came the internet and ubiquitous computers and DRM removal. And DVD players that could be reprogrammed to ignore region coded DVDs.

    The technology is moving much too fast for your worst case scenario to come about. There are way too many people in the world that understand the technology, how it works, how to bypass it. The trend is towards open, unrestricted, communication of information. When you are fighting trends like this, you have to be 100% successful. Less than 100% and the trend will eventually overtake you.

    I don’t think most people really realize how much the digital landscape and the internet has already changed our world. They see pieces of it, but they still don’t see the full picture, mostly because it hasn’t finished yet. It has advantages and disadvantages, and it can be scary. But it’s happening anyway. It’s not that the pros necessarily outweigh the cons, but that it confers tremendous advantages on those that adopt, vs those that don’t. And that leads to a dichotomy. Intelligent individuals that look at the “pro/con” tradeoffs, as it affects them, will often be scared of it. Ones that look at the competitive and/or social aspects, personal or business, have no choice.

    So I don’t see your worst case picture coming about.

  32. phillipsjk says:

    In the long run, we are all dead
    That was not a “worst-case” scenario, that was my medium-term prediction. I feel that TPMs will actually have a relatively small effect on the development of the computer industry: over the long term of 300 years or more.

    “Worst case” is that analog technology without some kind of digital “hook” may become illegal. For example, you wouldn’t be able to buy a CRT not just because the economies of scale are no longer there, but also because HDCP would be pointless (it would be physically impossible for a CRT to meet robustness rules).

    In another thread somebody pointed out that black markers have been used as circumvention devices. Will “circumvention device” become legally interpreted much like “weapon”; everybody has them, but possession is only illegal if you use them? The periodic review clause should hopefully reign in egregious problems, but I am too cynical to count on it.

  33. RE: phillipsjk
    “They are already phasing out general-purpose computers. If your computer is running Windows Vista, 7, or iPhone OS, it is more accurately described as a “computing console.”

    Indeed. See: trusted computing – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_computing

  34. RE: phillipsjk
    “They are already phasing out general-purpose computers. If your computer is running Windows Vista, 7, or iPhone OS, it is more accurately described as a “computing console.”

    Unfortunatley, for such things, that leaves a very large number of people truely stuck between a rock and a hard place. For someone like me, Linux would be sufficient “most” of the time, but some things, like most games, just won’t work on Linux. I don’t play that much anymore, but I like to have the option to kill some Zombies in Left 4 Dead 2 occasionally. I’m usually “fairly” current on hardware, but media and hardware support are usually lacking, or at least somewhat behind, in Linux. I could dual boot, but why bother going through all that effort if Linux can’t do everything I need and doesn’t support my current hardware? Yes, there is software like VLC and deCSS, which support most media formats, but what happens when C-32 makes such software illegal (Which it will)? These are questions I bet a growing number of people will find themselves asking.

  35. Un-Trusted Computing says:

    Or how I learned to stop worrying about Linux, and Boxed in my Windows installation.
    Linux still is the answer.

    If you absolutely need Windows (or OS X) for games or Photoshop or whatever, you can dual Boot, run it in Wine, or have a disposable Windows in a virtual machine (comes in handy if your Windows only solution has low CPU requirements)

    Either way its not the end of the world… most folks who usually default to windows, secretly love it anyways and can’t stand what its doing to their rights and their computers. Vote with your wallets and grow if that’s the case.

    For example; I’m a gamer but I use Linux… some of my games are available on Linux outright (World of Goo, Machinarium) Some work fine in Wine (L4D, CS, HL) others only work in Windows… so when I need to Game on Games that require windows, I reboot my machine, and log into Windows…

    My Windows rig only has Steam, the games that only run in Windows, and Firefox. The rest is all installed on my Ubuntu partition.

    Are there scary copyright issues that would take away linux users rights? Yes… software patents are gross and hinder progress… but claiming you’re married to Windows because of specific applications reeks of laziness. C’mon guys no ones gonna win this fight by only venting your frustrations on this blog.

    Captcha: Foulmouth Crimination :p

  36. phillipsjk says:

    @IamME
    One of the reason driver support is lacking is because the hardware
    interface is secret on modern hardware: at least in part because of the DRM it implements. For hardware like Video cards, HDMI with HDCP support is required for Vista and Windows 7 certification. I suspect the “robustness rules” are one of the reasons Vista drivers were initially buggy and delayed. The video card vendors are required under contract to make their hardware and software hard to debug.

    Gnu/Linux is now popular enough that some companies like Nvidia and Adobe release “binary blobs” just like they do for Windows or Mac OS. However, if you want to do something “weird,” like use FreeBSD, run on a PowerPC, or use a 10 year old video card for 3D acceleration (because it would still take a load off the CPU), you need access to the hardware interface. Right now, some of the best 3D accelerators for Gnu/Linux are Integrated Intel chipsets. Ironic, since I am convinced the CPU serial number facilitates some kind of secret back-door (no, you won’t find it through testing (not just Tin-foil hat, Intel backs many DRM initiatives)).

  37. @Un-Trusted Computing
    I think my point was missed…

    My point is, that in general **AA’s and gaming industries are making it more difficult for Linux users (Not easier) and when it comes to computers, people as a whole, are generally lazy. On top of that, I would argue less than 10% of the population could build a dual boot setup and get it all working properly. Some of those who could wouldn’t bother if they have to install both OS’s anyway. So, some would give up some things and stick with Linux, while others go the other way and go with “big box” Microsoft, and other still, go with Apples (Which runs Linux in the back end anyway).

    I used to have an Ubuntu partitian, but removed it after about a year since it didn’t support my Fatal1ty sound card…effectively making my Linux partitian a glorified e-mail client. I think that has since been resolved, but it was well over a year after the card release before garnering support. Before that, I purchased a commercial copy of Mandriva Linux (Version 9 I think) which I cannot install because the intaller doesn’t know what to do with my dual GPU video card(s)…the installation dies with an “Unsupported display type” error…something like that (There were hardware support reasons requiring me to go with a commercial copy). It’s experiences like this that drive people away from Linux and/or make Linux “scary” for people. Say what you want about Windows and Microsoft, but in general it works, and you don’t need to be a sys-admin to make it work.

    That being said, I do run a Linux file server. Linux is a fantastic server OS as well as a great Web development OS. As a general use and Internet user OS, it would probably be fine with few issues. As a power user OS, I think it falls short since the software just isn’t there and required hardware support is often quite behind. Either way, this is off topic. :D

  38. phillipsjk says:

    off-topic
    That is probably at least partly my fault. I am a little PO’d that the idea that the free software movement is “anti-copyright” is gaining any traction at all: even in the minds of our opponents. (Again off-topic from “Balanced Copyright for Canada” funding.)

    I’ve been meaning to add 2 more letters (about copyright reform) to my website over the past two days, but have been procrastinating. Need to implement a straight-forward, but slightly tedious move for my existing copyright page to a /copyright/ sub-directory.

  39. The current copyright Law (C-42)
    Before Moore & Co take it down, here is a copy of the current copyright legislation.

    URL1 HTML: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/FullText.html
    URL2 PDF: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/PDF/Statute/C/C-42.pdf

    If you check Section VIII of that legislation, you will see that there are already provisions in place that restrict non-profit private use rights. Hence, the media conglomerates are already enjoying quite strong protection for their works. Why then are Moore & Co pushing this Bill C-32 down our throats and giving them even more rights with TPM restrictions? Is this to open up venues to lawsuits against ordinary citizens that go over previous legal cases that limited their compensation under C-42?

    That same legislation (C-42) also deals with tariffs on blank media. They could just easily expand the tariff sections to include digital distribution via Internet and make everyone happy (we could even write it for them). Why is this so hard for Moore & Co to comprehend?

    They are making a very wrong assumption that people don’t want to pay for digital media. The majority do and creators need to be paid, just in a manner that is fair to consumers as well. Tariffs are a very simple solution to all this drama.

  40. @IamMe

    You appear knowledgeable in linux however, most the bugs you list have since been addressed.
    One example you give: Left4dead2, works perfectly fine for me in Ubuntu lucid. In fact I played left4dead2 hours before posting this.
    Another example: dual GPU video cards. I shared this problem some time ago it has since been fixed in recent driver updates over a year ago. I run dual screens using xinerama as well and I havent had any issues.

    Any copyright legislation would have an impact on the linux community which you’re indeed correct. I wrote to my MP to address these issues. Sadly she has either been gagged or can’t explain why a particular political party is content with criminalizing an entire range of current/future FOSS software. I suspect when confronted, not a single member of this astroturf group could explain the reasoning for such measures without making visible a vested interest.

  41. shangxeov said:

    OMG.. please learn what a paragraph is….

  42. @RenderMe
    As I said, it’s been some time since I really tried Linux. My one Linux box is strictly a file server and runs Fedora Core character only (No X-windows). Perhaps I’ll give Linux another try over the winter. Mint looks interesting as a “user” OS (i.e. One my wife might accept) and many people consider it to be better than Ubuntu. As a note, back then the dual GPU cards (nVidia 7950 at that time) would run in VESA mode under Linux if installed after the OS was installed. It was an incompatability issue with the installer. It may all be moot if developer hands are tied and the apps I need are no longer available and no longer legal under Linux.

    Now that I’m no longer a student and can actually afford it, I’m finally 99% legit with my software. I’d rather not step backward.

  43. Could you guys tone down the Linux zealotry a bit? There are special websites for those kinds of rants.

  44. Un-Trusted Computing says:

    @Alexey
    Linux comments are appropriate as they apply to Canadian copyright trying to emulate Software Patents regime in the US.

    The “anti-circumvention” clause could; if applied incorrectly, severly restrict everyday uses of our computers.

    I don’t see any zealotry going on here.

  45. phillipsjk says:

    @Alexey
    I see off-topic discussion dealing with Linux, but no “Linux zealotry” per se. If you think my comments about Vista, 7, and iPhone OS are zealotry, educate yourself about the “protected (media) path” and “walled gardens.”

    @Glenn – The wall o’ text hides that hard sell at the end.

  46. Many of the above posts give much more space to OS advertisement than to addressing any specific copyright-related issues. It would be interesting to read how exactly the new copyright bill would affect open software, without the soliciting.

  47. @Alexey
    “Many of the above posts give much more space to OS advertisement than to addressing any specific copyright-related issues. It would be interesting to read how exactly the new copyright bill would affect open software, without the soliciting.”

    Back to specifics and no soliciting for either choice. There are currently no “legal” options for playing copy-protected DVD/BD or TPM protected music on Linux. C-32, in its current form, would make free, open-source software such as deCSS and VLC media player (Amoung others) illegal in Canada.

  48. OSS and copyright
    As a correction that is important here, Mac OS runs on a BSD variant, not Linux. The difference between them is copyright, where Linux is GPL-v2 the BSD license is as permissive as it gets; hence why Apple can do whatever they want with it without releasing their code.

    If you want to understand the copyright issues for hardware read the wikis of the Nouveau [http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/] or Radeon GPUs. Both projects could be illegal with C-32, depending on the interpretation of the courts.

    The Wine [winehw.org] mailing lists also cover some of the intricacies of reverse-engineering a copyrighted implementation (MS Windows API). Running many programs in Wine could also be considered illegal, even if Wine itself is not. Wine does not implement TPM support because it cannot distribute that due to the DMCA in the US so every game I buy I need to crack. Except Civilization IV, because the creator released a patch removing the TPMs.

  49. phillipsjk says:

    The “most free” license
    BSD is *almost* a permissive as it gets, but not quite: the WTFPL is even more permissive. http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/

  50. Why the U.S.?
    Why are we trying to satisfy the U.S. specifically? Isn’t WIPO an international treaty? Seems to me we should be seeking to satisfy on the international scene, NOT the U.S.

    http://www.singoramareviews.com