IFPI Links Canada - EU Free Trade Negotiations With Copyright Reform |
| Print | |
|
Thursday May 07, 2009
|
|||||||
|
On the day that Canada and the European Union officially announced talks to strike a comprehensive free trade agreement, the IFPI, the international arm of the RIAA and CRIA, used the opportunity to pressure Canada to engage in copyright reform. In fact, in short commentary in European Voice, IFPI Executive Vice President Frances Moore suggested that the copyright reforms should happen before free trade talks begin. Moore sings out of the USTR songbook by stating that: Canada has one of the world's highest levels of internet piracy and one of the weakest IP enforcement systems. The country suffers from serious legislative deficiencies and a lack of engagement by its enforcement authorities. The piece concludes by stating that without copyright reforms, "trade agreements will be of little value." Comments (3)
Jason K
said:
|
|||||||
|
... The more they keep pressing for stronger IP laws with this type of bias, the more their voice fades. So far the IPFI has yet to release any substantive evidence that Canada is lagging behind. Just 2 years ago one of our Canadian artists who doesn't believe in suing consumers ended up at the top of the legal digital download charts globally, then in almost the same sentence in the 2007 release they slam us for copyright reform. The stupidity of those lobbying for strong reforms here in Canada is becoming clearer every day. Their augments are without merit, and without evidence to validate their positions. All that's being presented by industry is bias ideology, and conflicting reports. Because of this, their voice is very much becoming a whisper. |
|
... I guess it is true what they say about the big lie... People assume it must be true because otherwise why would someone exaggerate that much. It sounds like what Moore is saying is that Canada has yet to sell out completely to corporate interests. |
|
... Does Canada have weak enforcement? how do you measure that? number of arrests, or the language in the law, or what? |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
