For the thousands of Canadians that have participated in consultations and sent letters to their MPs, there is reason for concern. On one side, there are the major copyright lobby groups who have put forward a dizzying array of demands that would overhaul Bill C-11. As I described it in a post yesterday:
The net effect of the music industry demands represents more than a stunning overhaul of Bill C-11 as it is effectively calling for a radical reform of the Internet in Canada. Taken together, the proposals would require Internet providers to block access to foreign sites, take down content without court oversight, and disclose subscriber information without a warrant. On top of those demands, the industry also wants individuals to face unlimited statutory damages and pay a new iPod tax. If that were not enough, it also wants an expanded enabler provision that is so broadly defined as potentially capture social networking sites and search engines.
On the other side, there are groups such as Access Copyright that are calling on their members to urge the government and committee MPs to undo the Supreme Court of Canada’s CCH decision on fair dealing.
While many of these demands are clearly far beyond “technical amendments” and should be ruled out of order, the last minute push must be met by Canadians who favour a balanced approach to copyright reform that retains the best of Bill C-11 and makes some modest changes to digital locks, the one remaining area of concern. Open Media has launched a Say No campaign that makes it easy to speak out.
My message to the MPs focuses on three simple principles:
1. No SOPA-style amendments. That means no website blocking, no warrantless disclosure of subscriber information, no expanded enabler provision, no unlimited statutory damages, no iPod tax, and no content takedowns.
2. Maintain the fair dealing balance found in C-11 by expanding the provision to include education, parody, and satire and relying on the Supreme Court’s six-factor test to ensure that the dealing is fair.
3. Amend the digital lock rules by following the Canadian Library Association’s recommended change linking circumvention to actual copyright infringement.
The message is going to my local MP, the Ministers and to Bill C-11 committee members:
Christian.paradis@parl.gc.ca
James.moore@parl.gc.ca
Dean.delmastro@parl.gc.ca
Mike.lake@parl.gc.ca
Phil.mccoleman@parl.gc.ca
Peter.braid@parl.gc.ca
Rob.moore@parl.gc.ca
Scott.armstrong@parl.gc.ca
Paul.calandra@parl.gc.ca
Glenn.thibeault@parl.gc.ca
Charlie.angus@parl.gc.ca
Tyrone.Benskin@parl.gc.ca
Pierre.Nantel@parl.gc.ca
Pierre.DionneLabelle@parl.gc.ca
Andrew.Cash@parl.gc.ca
Geoff.regan@parl.gc.ca
(single email to the Ministers and committee members)
The final committee stage starts Monday. Make sure the MPs hear your voice as they discuss amendments to the bill.
Ammend Bill C-11
Parliament is about to infringe of the digital rights of Canadians in a serious way. The bill must be ammended otherwise a firestorm will descend up the conservative party of Canada by way of social media to remove you from power. I live in Stephen Harper’s riding in SW Calgary and will make it my goal to have him lose his seat here come next federal election. Anything is possible. Especially this. Be warned. We are legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.
Personally I think that Mr. Moore and his office are mostly ignoring any letters to do with this at this point. Still haven’t got a response to the last time I tried emailing them.
My letter to the committee
Dear Ministers & Committee members,
As you consider the new copyright bill, clause by clause next week, I would encourage you to put weight to the desires and opinions of the general public. For too long the impetuous behind such legislation has been to corporate interests. I believe that over reaching restrictions and an excessively punitive atmosphere will be of greater harm to artists than a balanced approach that respects the wishes of both artists & their audience.
The requests from some groups purporting to represent creators would turn back the clock on our digital economy and stifle innovation, all in the name of protecting certain institutions paper castles. It is time for Canada to diversify past oil & lumber and tap into the creativity of our talented citizens. In the artistic & digital industries we are set to thrive if we have a forward looking approach. Bill C-11 I think was a good start of enabling our cultural workers, and by adjusting the digital lock rules to rightly apply to infringing activity, it can protect the rights of the Canadian public.
I appreciate this is a complex topic and I wish you wisdom and patience as you honestly weigh the requests from all the stakeholders.
my email
Dear Ministers & Committee members,
Please consider who this bill helps and who it hurts, as well as who it is pushing for it. I do not believe that this bill does anything to help the general public, nor the artists who you claim to protect. This protection ensures the dominance of the few large media companies and stifles the small content creators. The internet, as it exists now, levels the playing field for the small artists and the large corporations and it’s important to keep that competition open as it fosters new ideas. Artists are tired of having corporate interests use their names in ways they don’t agree with (http://www.musiccreators.ca/) listen to the artists and the people of Canada, not the media corporations.
Why are iTunes rules so different?
Ironically, if you buy content from iTunes (or subscribe to Netflix) you ARE ALLOWED to watch on MULTIPLE DEVICES (even at the same time) from any location on the globe. So I’d love to hear C11 proponents explain why the rules are so different when we buy the same content from a CD/DVD/Bluray?
Content protection has some merits, but this is pure BS.
…
Building from Crockett’s e-mail and from what I’ve read here and elsewhere, here is my e-mail:
Dear Ministers & Committee members,
As you consider the new copyright bill, clause by clause next week, I would encourage you to put weight to the desires and opinions of the general public. For too long the impetuous behind such legislation has been to corporate interests. I believe that over reaching restrictions and an excessively punitive atmosphere will be of greater harm to artists than a balanced approach that respects the wishes of both artists & their audience.
No SOPA-style amendments. That means no website blocking, no warrantless disclosure of subscriber information, ESPECIALLY to non-law-enforcement bodies, no expanded enabler provision, no unlimited statutory damages, and no content take-downs again, ESPECIALLY, not without established and undisputed proof. Such heavy-handed tactics have proven ineffective in the US and other places that have have tried them. Why is our entertainment industry so eager to repeat the mistakes made in the US? It’s a mystery to me.
Maintain the fair dealing balance found in C-11 by expanding the provision to include education, parody, and satire and relying on the Supreme Court’s six-factor test to ensure that the dealing is fair.
The requests from some groups purporting to represent creators would turn back the clock on our digital economy and stifle innovation, all in the name of protecting certain business models which are substantially older than our current copyright law. It is time for Canada to diversify past oil & lumber and tap into the creativity of our talented citizens. In the artistic & digital industries we are set to thrive if we have a forward looking approach and not one which stifles innovation and holds us in the past.
Bill C-11 I think was a good start for enabling our cultural workers, and by adjusting the digital lock rules to rightly apply to infringing activity, it can protect the rights of the Canadian public. By not linking digital lock rules to infringing activity, I fear that C-11 could potentially fail a constitutional challenge, which will surely come. Digital locks affect personal property, such as BD/DVDs, potentially CDs again, CD/BD/DVD players, game systems and all electronics in general, which are all “property”, purchased and owned by the consumer. Such “property” falls under the jurisdiction of the provinces, not the federal government. Again, this can be fixed by linking digital lock rules to infringing activity, as suggested by the Canadian Library Association
One the topic of expanding the levy to be applied to “proven” devices such as iPods and dedicated MP3 music players (NOT SD cards), I’m perhaps more receptive than most, but, again, the overarching digital lock rules have to be tied to infringement.
I appreciate this is a complex topic and I wish you wisdom and patience as you honestly weigh the requests from all the stakeholders.
This is my email…
Dear Ministers,
As a Canadian, I’m concerned about the recent demands made by the Music Industry and the extreme changes that they want.
I believe that those changes will violate Canadians’ rights and freedoms, and speaking for many other Canadians, I strongly reject these following changes:
>Internet Blocking
>Removal of Fair Dealing Extensions (Satire, Parody, etc.)
>Removal of Protections for User Generated Content
>iPod Tax
>Extension of the Term of Copyright
>The requirement for Internet providers to disclose
subscriber information without court oversight
based on allegations of infringement
>Unlimited Statutory Damage Awards
>Content Takedown System with no Court Oversight
I believe in a fair and flexible copyright, and the changes that the Music Industry wants will take away the right and freedoms that Canadians have.
No people…no money…
So when the internet is gone, and mom, dad, and the teens are in jail…
Who will be left to buy the music, who will be left to buy the products?
Who will be left, when we are all guilty.
>?
Will mediafire redirector addon for Firefox help with this being passed?
@John
I assume you mean MAFIAAfire and not Mediafire (Which is a direct DL file-locker site, much like Megaupload). If they were to adopt a full SOPA-like regime where circumvention of the DNS blocking were to be illegal, then MAFIAAfire, like TOR, would also be illegal since their primary use is to defeat web censorship and/or avoid tracking. Other tools that might be affected include i2p, FoxyProxy, FreeVPN, etc. All aimed at maintain privacy or circumventing content blocking (aka censorship).
I’m sorry ya that’s what I meant MAFIAAfire.
I’m not too familiar how it works in parliament but how many more talks do they have to go through before it goes to final and passes for good? Don’t they have a court look at it and they could possibly turn it down?
Yes, it’s called the Supreme Court of Canada.
@John “Don’t they have a court look at it and they could possibly turn it down?”
But unfortunately only after the fact.
If they do not change the digital locks circumvention provision to be for infringing purposes only then there will likely be a SC challenge based on provincial property rights jurisdiction.
hmmm
Can a public body, such as Open Media, go to the courts and request a judicial review of the bill before it passes? …say, based on constitutional concerns.
It seems like doing it after the fact is wasteful since everyone knows it’s going to be challenged and that bodies like Open Media are going to spearheading it.
Ridiculous
These content nazis are outrageous. The internet is all about them. Of course Harper and his far right wing conservative government will go along with whatever his corporate overlords tell him to do. In the name of greed even if it means changing the fundamentals of the Internet. Absolutely dispicable. In the end, it will be the people who will get shafted and the big corporations that pull the strings of the government will laugh all the way to the bank.
May we make an effective stand when the time is now.
My fellow countrymen and women. When the time comes to get off our chairs, I pray that we stand together. For this is our time and while we are not in the ground and while we are still breathing, we can face our government. Together we can decide what we need to make our time better for ourselves and for our future generations. We will stand at movie theaters, record and book stores with a message that it is “we the people” that allow these venues to profit within our society. And we will accept that we do not need movies, music and books to impose their profiteering doctrines upon us.
I hope that we may forget comfort for the time and make a demonstrative effort for what we have created together, a right to freedom of distribution of knowledge unrestricted by corporatism.
I hope that when the time comes we may shout in the streets and be proud to carry banners by our local schools and neighborhoods stating that we have worked hard together to establish a structure that permits a freedom of knowledge to all peoples equally and that we will no longer support industries that attempt to take control of us.
I really hope you guys are up for this,
Cheers,
@Joebil:
“…the big corporations that pull the strings of the government will laugh all the way to the bank.”
Maybe, but by the time they get to the bank, a great deal of their own customers will have been converted to enemies. As people discover what has been taken away from them in the process, they’ll start to put together who was responsible, and eventually stop supporting these companies. I can’t see how stripping away society’s rights, freedom and privacy can possibly achieve any lasting profit.
Personally, I think the corporates are just shaking a huge hornets’ nest, displaying a blatant false sense of entitlement they’ve developed over the years.
If you think things will change…
Does anyone believe that C-11 would get revoked or changed even after another party is in the house? Let’s face it, the opposition talks big about voting it down and may even do so in the house, but if they get in to power after the next election they won’t amend the bill or even change it.
All the political parties are as corrupt as the next. The whole system is broken and nobody (including me) has anything better to replace it with.
@Anonymous Coward
I’m with you, I have no faith at all in our government. I think the biggest hope for change will come in the form of constitutional challenges after the legislation has passed.
Voiceless…
I’ve contacted my MP several times about a few of the ridiculous bills that have been proposed recently, and all I ever get back (if anything) is a form letter that makes it obvious that not even my MP’s assistants are bothering to read past the first sentence.
Is there a way to actually have my message heard?
J. Anderson
If I send a message to my MP I usually CC all the committee members on the given legislation and all the opposition party leaders. Nearly 20 people in the case of C-11, including the C11 consultation e-mail, CC11@parl.gc.ca.
No more
When I was a child, records were large vinyl things. They were stamped on a press that weighed several tons in a large factory. The master disc was a sheet of metal cut by a diamond needle on a special turntable that also cost in the five to six figure range and needed to be replaced regularly with a fresh one.
The records were then packaged in a printed cardboard sleeve in a large factory, also printed on a large press that cost in the six-figure range, and wrapped by another expensive machine in cellophane. They were then shipped by large trucks to a huge warehouse where they were tracked and stored. Eventually another large truck would take them to a store, which like all stores needed to pay its lease and utilities and taxes and the salaries of its employees, and the record was then put on a shelf.
They cost $10-15.
An album is now a set of digital files on a server. It is made of nothing and costs a fraction of a cent to distribute and nothing at all to “manufacture”.
And yet, they still cost: $10-15. The currency is worth 30% less, true. but the content is worth about 99% less. The musicians still get the same measly 5% or so if they are lucky and don’t end up owing due to the screw-artist contracts they end up with. The profits are just unreal.
This unbelievable greed is what the music industry is fighting tooth and nail to uphold, and they’ll destroy the internet, possibly the greatest invention of humanity, and make us all into criminals in the process to do it.
So, I won’t ever buy anything from them again, not at this price, not this way. Newsflash: It’s just entertainment. I can do without or find alternatives. I encourage everyone to do the same.
What will happen to us?
I’m genuinly scared now, this is shaking me to my core and I feel a little light headed.
Are we really going down this path? Are we all going to be in jail, or fined, or worse for simply using the internet?
Why do these people want to hurt Canadians? Why do they want to harm Canadian families, and businesses?
Aren’t these people also Canadian?
What will happen when we are all in jail, and their is no internet. What will they do then?
Why is this happening?!
This serves as pretty strong reinforcement for my belief that it’s unethical to buy any entertainment content that may, in some way, finance these big content companies. Sure piracy is wrong, but endorsing entertainment cartels is too. It means ingesting less entertainment. It means seeing more live shows. It’s hard being idealistic.
Canada is about to get a bit more fascist in the digital realm at the behest of the entertainment mafia. A big hats off to Michael Geist et al for continuing to fight the good fight. Let’s hope this piece of legislation gets demonized enough to be thrown out. Let’s hope it makes some of it’s political champions look bad. Let’s throw a wrench in the political works. The less they do the less they harm they cause.
IT Admin
Given the fact that the government (at least some of it’s employed staff) has been found to have downloaded content while directly 5 doors away from the Commons floor, the government would have to think of it’s bottom line as well.
As we already pay levies on most media that we purchase and also take on whatever media we send up getting double dipped on that tax will hit a sour note with most of us (Mr Geist included).
There is also that fact that if this bill comes into play it’ll have more of an effect on all parties as well. Most of them have taken to blogging and tweeting which is an inherent danger for them. Example, a staffer tweets about a House Of Commons ruling and quotes the Speaker. That of course is a reprint without permission and subject to the new law that they are trying to propose.Or,this person speaks about Mr Geists app (up above) and links there blog to download the app. Copyright infringement.
Mr Harper goes out to his constituents and has a song playing in the background from his bus which is then televised nationally on CTV. Copyright infringement.
The government has several domains online on the internet using technology that is either borrowed (in whole or part either directly or unbeknownst to them),bought or aqquired the rights to. They create a sub domain of say a learning site using part of the code from their original site. They did not pay the user or acknowledge them officially for it’s use. Copyright infringement.
I am no way in a position to complain (as i am one of the more than half of all Canadians who did not vote) but the view is this,if this law comes to pass the content that they are so eagerly trying to protect will stay on their mediums as this will also have an effect on hardware and other industries who rely on people to get the content in the first place. If you can’t take your DVD(which is yours once purchased by law with which you can do so as you please under the Charter), and copy it to your phone to watch on the TTC or a bus from Calgary to Squamish or the very long ferry ride from NS to Newfoundland,then why purchase the devices that would make this possible? What would Sony or Toshiba do? What about the conduits for that content do? Bell and Rogers, the 2 largest players will have spent a great deal of delivery money on a product that will not perform because people are not interested in the medium anymore.
What about the Commons? What happens when they realize that no one pays attention to their broadcasts anymore and they ask why consumers are not watching it on the internet or their televisions? They would point the finger at each other first and then realize the bill they had passed and by then it will be far too late.
So let this be a sign of things to come, act now and say your piece and hold our government (who does the job we ask them to as we are the ones who pay them)or forever hold it being the good citizen you are and let Mr Harper and big media sell your freedoms by the dollar. Don’t believe me? Ask the software lumber industry, i am more than sure they’ll be more than happy to spell it out for you.
Also ask your self this, who has a right to tell you what to do with your own lawfully obtained possessions?
Mr Geist, you have my respect.
@AC, Chill!
The sensation of doom is exactly what they want you to feel; don’t give them the satisfaction. Instead of moping and lashing out, do something productive: join a Pirate Party, organize protests, set up (Piratebox) devices, draft legislation… Moaning and groaning won’t do a thing, but getting into action will.
Before you throw your hands up in the air – remember, it took effort from the citizenry to right many a wrong.
Nameless, ‘cuz a coward always hides behind a mask.
Alternatives
I should have posted these in my previous post, but here are some without resorting to anything illegal:
– Buy used. CDs, DVDs and Blu-Rays can be bought used at shops and on the internet. I’m sure the industry will eventually find a way to get rid of this (the software industry already has with its “online activation” garbage to prevent resale) but so far every court has upheld the right to resell your legally purchased media.
– Use libraries. Most municipal libraries offer movie DVDs and music CDs as well as books.
– Buy online direct-to-artist. Many musicians now release their own material for purchase with 100% going to the creative minds that made the music, rather than 95%-100% going to a sleazy middleman in an overpriced suit who makes nothing but contracts, lawsuits and profits, and finances this kind of legislation. (I was more than happy to buy Loreena McKennitt’s latest album in lossless FLAC format this way.)
– As noted, see and hear your favorite musicians live. They make far more money this way and it usually doesn’t go to the recording industry.
You can have it all, enjoying music, keeping legal and not putting a dime in the industry’s pocket.
@AC
I buy vast amounts of movies second hand, sometimes 40 or 50 at a time, or wait a year or two for them to hit el-cheapo bargain bins.
I also buy direct from artist when possible, but as much as I love her music, and even signed up for her mailing list a long time ago, before all the copyright crap, I would not spend a red penny to support Loreena McKennitt. She is one of the staunchest supporters of strict copyright in Canada and has released some ridiculous press releases on the topic. It completely ruins her for me.
Email to the committee
Dear Honourable Members of the Committee,
I would like to provide my views on Copyright reform.
I am against a policy that blatantly demonstrates pandering to the
entertainment industry lobbyists. As a Canadian, I would expect Canada to
show leadership in guiding the world towards a more balanced copyright.
Balanced means that the length of copyright terms are reduced to the original
14 years plus a 14 year extension, personal use copying is unrestricted, and
copyrighted materials may not be locked using technologies that restrict the
use of copyrighted works.
The current length of terms and the digital lock rule proposals are
effectively stealing my culture from me, meaning that I will never be able to
take any of the art, music, books, or other entertainment that I grew up with
and use it to celebrate my life in innovative ways. This wholesale theft of
my culture disheartens me greatly. The public domain is being destroyed.
As a Canadian, I ask that you take note of the various global protests by the
world’s citizens and say “No†to this proposed importation of failed U.S. SOPA
and ACTA-like copyright policy.
Should the entertainment industry lobbyists win the day, you will lose my vote
and the vote of anyone else whom I can convince that what is being pushed by
the entertainment industry is an affront to the culture, rights and dignity of
Canadians.
I will also cease to purchase any products that are produced by those who
would lobby for these laws. Please do the right thing and restore and
maintain a balanced copyright system.
Thank you for your consideration.
@IamME
re: “…I would not spend a red penny to support Loreena McKennitt. She is one of the staunchest supporters of strict copyright in Canada and has released some ridiculous press releases on the topic. It completely ruins her for me.”
Thanks… I didn’t know that. She’s fortunate I didn’t before I bought her albums too. 🙁
Write to your ISP!
I urge every person living in Canada to write to their ISP and ask that their ISP oppose Bill C-11.
I have already written to mine to let them know that, as a customer, I expect them to defend my interests and if they won’t, I will take my business to an ISP who cares.
Even if you are with one of the smaller ISPs, write to them, it will help.
First, “80% of Canadian ISPs oppose Bill C-11” sounds better than “Bell and Rogers oppose Bill C-11”.
Second, some small ISPs will likely take this opportunity to oppose Bill C-11 in an attempt to get good PR and attract subscribers. This will encourage the larger ISPs to oppose Bill C-11 too in order to keep their customers.
If you don’t know what to write, here’s is my suggestion for a few paragraphs:
– Briefly describe Bill C-11 (mention some of the issues with the bill)
– Explain why you are personally opposed to the bill
– Ask if your ISP opposes the bill and what it does to oppose it
– Say that as a customer, you expect your ISP to defend your interests (you can add that you will change ISPs if yours doesn’t oppose Bill C-11)
– Add a short closing statement “I hope you will stand against Bill C-11”, “I trust you will defend your customers against this bill”, etc.
Be polite (being aggressive won’t help), check your spelling and typing mistakes the best you can, add some courtesy formulas to sound professional (“Dear ISP”, “Best regards”, etc.) and you’re set to go!
Why does no other industry in the world demand these powers?
“block access to foreign sites, take down content without court oversight, and disclose subscriber information without a warrant. On top of those demands, the industry also wants individuals to face unlimited statutory damages and pay a new iPod tax”
Even agribusiness and banking don’t demand these incredibly dangerous, dictatorial, above-the-law powers. Why does only the Hollywood Mafia, and no other industry, want these types of powers?
James Moore ignores his constituents
I echo what Ki writes above, only more so. I live in James Moore’s riding and I believe he is ignoring my e-mails, too. This is a safe-for-Conservatives riding (margin of 10s of thousands) so I don’t think he cares particularly much what any individual voter here thinks as too many of them don’t recognize these actions as a threat to their freedoms.
How the hell did corporations get so powerful that they’re now telling our elected officials what the law shoudl be???
This country’s a total disgrace. The Conservatives if they push this through is gone as a party. No way anyone will ever elect this piece of shit party when they act this way. Harper will be the very last Convervative leader ever for this country.
I am writing to express my opposition to bill C-11 for the following reasons.
The recording industry is trying to forbid consumers from making informed choices on
which entertainment content to choose by restricting them to relying on industry
advertising as to the suitability of the content they are purchasing. This ignores the
subjective needs of the individual to choose content based on the individual’s
criteria rather than the industry’s economic model.
The parliamentary process should not be suborned to enforce the failed business
practices of any commercial enterprise.
In particular, I ask you to reject any legislation enabling website blocking,
warrantless disclosure of subscriber data, unlimited statutory damages, iPod taxes,
content takedowns, or expanded enabler provisions designed to prevent consumers from
determining the suitability of content to their needs.
It’s ok…
Let them pass it, the citizens will take this law to court, failing that use our constitutional right to jury nullification to a broken law. If “lawmakers” pass laws that the society doesn’t approve, it will be removed as ‘law’. I’m sick and tired of politicians writing laws who have no authority on subject matters. It’s time for Canadians to force changes, and by that I mean we need constitutional changes forced onto the federal government top stop this corruption.
Never doubt
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” (Margret Mead)
ISPs…
There’s no point in writing to the ISPs, they will never oppose C-11. 1, they’re very heavily linked and tied into the corporations that are pushing for this bill to be passed into law. 2, they have never sided with us; anything they can adopt that puts them in a position of power over it’s subscribers will be very heavily endorsed by them.
The most infuriation aspect of all this is that companies like Rogers and Bell have been so heavily subsidized and then handed the keys to Canada’s communications infrastructure and yet instead of feeling indebted to the Canadian people who made their empires possible, they look to bleed every last dime and every last functioning nerve, out of us.
My letter to my MP, Lee Richardson (Calgary-Centre)
I don’t need to tell you what’s wrong with C-11. I’ll leave that to Professor Michael Geist, who I’m sure you’re at least familiar with. Enterprise and business need protection, but this bill goes too far and will criminalize good-willed Canadians and suppress creativity and the free flow of culture.
It’s a disappointment to me that the Conservative Party has never truly pursued any real policy of free voting in the House, and arguable has decreased the individual freedom of our MPs to vote with their conscious and constituents, rather than party. This top-down approach to governance means that Canadians have a government that operates as a myopic behemoth.
I suspect the vast majority of our MPs are good people. It’s the system you’re a part of that is the issue. If you act outside of the party’s accepted boundaries, you risk losing your position, the support of the party in riding nomination battles, the visibility that goes with being a candidate of the party, and ultimately, your seat, job, career and pension and benefits.
The thought that’s on my mind now is simply, what does it mean to trade your principles for this coveted position in the bosom of the party? I firmly believe that the Conservative party is moving the country in the wrong direction, against the flow of history and in the favour only of special interest groups who keep the party in their pocket.
What does it mean to be on the wrong side of history? Canada’s political history is too short and maybe too tame to offer ready examples, so we have to look south of the border. The American South was on the wrong side of history at the commencement of the American Civil War. Democrats were on the wrong side of history during the time of the civil rights movement. (I don’t mean to suggest that C-11 is on the same scale as slavery or the suppression of entire races, but these are well-understood examples that reflect my point.)
The Conservative Party of Canada is on the wrong side of history when it comes to freedom on the internet (never mind the Omnibus Crime Bill, which we will soon see proven was a mistake). It’s not hard to see the direction that society is taking, and the government should be legislating for the future, proactively, with an eye to making the Canadian experience greater, not more restrictive. Being on the wrong side of history means that the party, and its MPs, will forever be associated with being wrong. This is your legacy, and it will not be a positive one. When you go to vote in the House, at least part of you should wonder whether your voting decision will put you on the right, or the wrong, side of history.
This opportunity to contribute to the petition and email committee members got under my radar, although I have been following the issue.
How many more Canadians are ignorant of this opportunity?
How can we better raise the alarm and communicate these concerns to more Canadians who will have their rights infringed upon by this bill?
My letter to them
An example of why this bill is not needed: I work for Red Hat Inc., (www.redhat.com), and we just broke a Billion dollars[1] in sales last year. We sell software that people can copy, by design, we use a software license that ensures we have to share the source code and allow others to use it for free. Our business model not only takes into account the act of copying, but actively uses it to benefit ourselves (increased market and mind share).
Shouldn’t legislation be designed to benefit society (people), and not just protect a small corporate segment with an outdated business model, especially when that legislation will significantly harm people and society at large?
[1]
http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/02/how-red-hat-killed-its-core-productand-became-a-billion-dollar-business.ars