National Post Reports “Heavy Handed” Copyright Law Coming Next Week

The National Post's Don Martin reports that the copyright bill could be introduced next week with confirmation of the broad outlines of the bill I reported on earlier this month.  Martin, who, describes the forthcoming bill as heavy-handed, reports:

All signals suggest Heritage Minister James Moore has triumphed over the objections of Industry Minister Tony Clement, setting up Canada to march in excessively protected lockstep with a United States that boasts the toughest laws against pirated music or movies on the planet.

It may well be a legal constraint that's impossible to enforce, but the rumble out of the PMO suggests the new law will ignore the extensive public consultations that advocated a go-easy take on copying of CDs and DVDs in favour of robust anti-consumer limits on transferring or sharing content. If this comes to pass, the federal government will be headed for a very bad week when the House of Commons reconvenes on Tuesday.

While that is not how I would describe the outcome of the consultation – fair copyright is not the same as "go-easy" – Martin's report is wholly consistent with my earlier reporting that the PMO has sided with the out-of-touch Moore, who has emerged as a staunch advocate for a Canadian DMCA.  While the bill will undoubtedly include some elements designed to garner support from consumer and education groups, the U.S.-style approach to digital locks will effectively undermine the current fair dealing provision and any additional user-oriented reforms that find their way into the bill.


  1. Laurel L. Russwurm says:

    Here I am Jumping the Gun and Believing What I read about a Law that I haven’t but…
    I have to wonder how this could possibly be justified. James Moore is supposed to be Canada;s Minister of Heritage.

    My question is: whose heritage is he protecting? Certainly not Canada’s.

    I hope you’re wrong about this Mr. Geist.

  2. Harper is a Faustian puppet. He is going to criminalize kids and teens not old enough to vote him out. The NWO is here. Watch out kids, he may draft you and send you to Afghanistan.

  3. “Do your worst.”

  4. Mark A. McCutcheon says:

    Public consultation as legal constraint?
    If I’m reading the _Post_ story correctly, it suggests the public consultation is some kind of legal constraint on the proposed legislation, if it goes ahead with ignoring that consultation. I’m curious to know what kind of legal constraint the public consultation represents, if it’s “impossible to enforce.” Or (he says, hopefully) is there a way to enforce it?

  5. Everybody will just move over to Freenet (

  6. Dale Bolton says:

    So if this comes into play, does that mean that the Canadian Copyright Collective will no longer be able to collect the levies that are on all recordable media? Does that mean that we will be able to get a free copy of a movie or cd, with receipt, if our copy gets scratched or destroyed? Does it mean that the RIAA will have access to all my private internet traffic and be able to spy on me when I rip my legally purchased cd’s and put them on my iphone, then my ipod, then a mixed mp3 cd for my car? Does this mean that Canada is no longer Canada and is actually the 53rd state of the Facist States of America?

  7. I think that the single biggest problem with draconian copyright law is that it creates an environment where virtually everybody who thinks its stupid (which I’d dare say is a majority of people), is just going to ignore the law and break it behind closed doors, and the government not only has no ability to prosecute those people, but absolutely no intention to do anything to prosecute those people either.

    In other words, by making virtually every private individual a criminal a priori, if one of them should ever happen to do something they don’t like that isn’t actually illegal, well then they have something they can hold over that person to shut them down.

  8. blah
    What? You thought you lived in a Democracy? These pigs work for multinationals not you or I.

  9. Worse problem is…
    It entrenches by fiat an obsolete business model which drags the whole economy down.
    Smashing looms mandated by our government loons.

  10. Sean Hunt says:

    Re: Public consultation as legal constraint?
    Unfortunately, the consultation has no legal power. What it does have, however, is political power. The consultation will hopefully reinforce the opposition parties’ positions and possibly even send them to the polls with a new platform element.

  11. Jean Naimard says:

    It is not very imporant anyways.
    India has passed a law that allows all that’s (purportedly) not going to be allows in the bill. So we’ll be able to download the software that allows it from servers hosted in India.

    And besides, such a law would be unapplicable given that there will be wholesale and large-scale violation of that law.

    CAPTCHA: BERNARD harrowed

  12. Jean Naimard says:

    Foreign DVDs for immigrants
    One thing that’s very important is to drive home the point that the bill will prohibit multi-region DVD players.

    This sure will ring nice with all those immigrants who are suddenly told they can no longer legally watch DVDs from China, Viêt-Nàm, India or Europe…

    CAPTCHA: coppiced the

  13. Crosbie Fitch says:

    End the doublethink
    Either copyright is an instrument of injustice and should be abolished, or it is a lovely law that makes us all happy and the harshest punishments should be applied to those who break it.

    You’re going to have to make your mind up sooner or later. The corporations’ monopolies or the people’s cultural liberty? Which do you prefer?

  14. winston smith, former conservative says:

    double plus bad. end of blogosphere, start of harpers zogosphere

  15. btrussell says:

    So we don’t have money to protect our own Country and enforce our borders, but we have money to enforce laws to prop up foreign business’?

  16. sad thing is…
    I can’t imagine that any Canadian will actually follow these laws should they come into effect. We’re too used to the way things have been for the past 10 or so years. We’re used to making mix CDs (and we’re cool with paying the levy on recordable media), ripping our DVDs so we can bring them on our laptops and iPhones, and making copies of our games. Introducing a new law to take all of that away isn’t going to stop people from doing it.

    It hasn’t in the states. It’s just become a policy nightmare. Paperwork. Court hearings. Wasted time.

    A “Canadian DMCA” is just a stupid idea. I’d really like to meet the boffin who came up with this gold gem. Though I’m sure Mr. Geist would be able to give him a more stiff talking to than I could sum up.

    Wonder what the backlash, if any, will be?

  17. Region Codes
    I am very concerned about what Jean Naimard said as I have and daily watch DVDs from HK and Japan. I legally bought them (together they’ve cost me over $1000) and the Conservative Government (who I didn’t even vote for) has no right to make my viewing of them illegal. These aren’t exactly DVDs I can pick up in region 1 in HMV and I probably never will be able to.

    Anyone know how Americans watch foreign region coded DVDs? I know they do.

    Oh well…I suppose I can always hope the government had the brains to make an excemption foe region codes (seeing as Canada is a “multicultural country”).

  18. Hindgrinder says:

    Big wave incoming m8s – get out your surfboard!
    i’ms ins yours skynets, loling aways ats yours futiles attempts at contrlling ours internets.

    HG – Harper hates lolcats. Vote for someone who understands internet culture.

  19. They did not listen; they’re not listening still
    Keep writing those Paper Letters – now do you see how much good peaceful protest does?

  20. @Dale:

    “So if this comes into play, does that mean that the Canadian Copyright Collective will no longer be able to collect the levies that are on all recordable media?”

    The Conservatives have opposed the levy for some time, so this is quite possible.

    “Does that mean that we will be able to get a free copy of a movie or cd, with receipt, if our copy gets scratched or destroyed?”

    Probably not, no.

    “Does it mean that the RIAA will have access to all my private internet traffic and be able to spy on me when I rip my legally purchased cd’s and put them on my iphone, then my ipod, then a mixed mp3 cd for my car?”

    Actually, you won’t be able to legally rip your legally purchased CD’s in the first place, even for personal use, unless the publisher gives you permission (either implicitly, by not having copy protections in place, or explicitly, by providing you with tools to do migrate the work to different media).

    “Does this mean that Canada is no longer Canada and is actually the 53rd state of the Facist States of America?”

    Unfortunately, we are getting there.


    “India has passed a law that allows all that’s (purportedly) not going to be allows in the bill. So we’ll be able to download the software that allows it from servers hosted in India.”

    Not legally, no. If the downloader happens to get caught, they could be punished for importing illegal goods.

    “And besides, such a law would be unapplicable given that there will be wholesale and large-scale violation of that law.”

    You’re right about there being wide-spread violation of the law that won’t be enforced, but I’d disagree at the notion that the law doesn’t matter because of it. In fact, by explicitly creating a law that is essentially always okay to break as long as you don’t get caught, it creates a system that actually encourages people to practice dishonesty and disregard for the legal system in general. The long term implications of something like that are not good – not even from the point of view of organizations that might have thought that these sort of changes are a good thing.

  21. Copyright law by the people for the people
    It’s time for an election. We kill the bill here and make this an election issue. Then who ever wins the election (Hopefully not Mr.Harper and his conservative goons) and we make the people see which party has the best open and fair copyright policy. Then hopefully That party gets elected.

  22. Disgruntled says:

    Quick & easy way to voice your displeasure about this
    Via the letter writing wizard put together by the Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights:

  23. Dean Owen says:

    What’s at stake
    Copyright is a legitimate method to ensure that creators receive credit and payment for their work. What’s at stake here is not whether creators rights should be protected but the eroding of democracy. When the government writes and passes legislation behind closed doors based on the needs of corporate special interest groups (lobbyists) and denies the people of the country, province or municipality their right to comment and even shape that legislation there is something seriously wrong. It is up to us to tell our elected officials that they work for us and remind them of this on a regular basis – otherwise they seem to forget this simple fundamental of democracy.

  24. anonymouse says:

    random question
    are there legitimate ways other than credit cards that people can use to purchase digital media online in Canada?

    i think most of the people caught for piracy might be the younger ones, the under-18 generation. How can they buy media online legally on their own – instead of going through parents’ credit cards?

  25. @anonymouse Youth can use paypal for direct withdrawals from a bank account but it’s cumbersome to setup. You also generally need a surety e.g. family members credit card, unless you plan to withdrawal money before purchasing but even then without a credit card one could wait 5 business days. I’m sure its frustrating and highly inconvenient for young people. Excellent point tho.

    I’ll be calling my MP the day I see the bill if this is true.

  26. oh come on now says:

    No really
    How many times do we have to defeat this retarded bill? Seriously, it seems like every year these morons bring it up again only to have it put down. Shouldn’t there be a limit on how many times corporate culture can try to regulate our lives?

  27. Anarchist Philanthrapist says:

    Say Good bye to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
    “Shouldn’t there be a limit on how many times corporate culture can try to regulate our lives? ”

    No doubt

    If this bill is ANYTHING like ACTA here are just a few of the things it will violate.

    Violation of The Privacy Act
    In the last 5 years the Canadian government enacted a very strict and very in-depth set of privacy laws. This new ACTA group would have the authority to override that by being able to request the private information from an individual’s Internet Service Provider (ISP) without a warrant and the ISP would be forced to comply with them even though it breaks the Privacy act. This is over copyright issues, not nuclear plans or protecting children, but making sure someone somewhere gets paid.
    Violation of the “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms”
    Section 7: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
    To me this relates back to the privacy act as “liberty and security” are a very much hand in hand with a persons individual privacy. This is especially in consideration of someone’s home, in which all acts are consider the persons private business. If ACTA / Bill C-c61 were to have gone through it would have meant the authorities would not need a warrant and could violate both a person’s home and Section 8 of the Charter over an issue of copied media.

    Section 8: Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.
    There have already been people at the border who have had their ipods seized and they’re laptops searched all in the sake of trying to find music and movies that could potentially be copyright material. The major issue with this is that in places like airports or crossing the border you aren’t going to be carrying all your CDs or DVDs with you. So how could you prove all the music on your iPod or movies on your laptop are legally yours. You can’t it’s not possible so giving the border guard the authority to seize a device such as a laptop or iPod can be construed as a violation of section 8 of the charter.
    We can also relate this section back to a person’s home and Section 7 as in regards to unreasonably seizing information and media that can be considered very private. For an example if a man and woman wish to video tape their relations and store it on their computer so they can watch it with each other over again they should be secure in the fact that a stranger is not going to enter their home uninvited an have the unreasonable right to watch these videos to make sure they aren’t downloaded off the internet, or having that same stranger read your wife’s personal diary. Another example would be if someone was running a business from their home and had persona and confidential information of not only themselves but for clients and corporations as well then an unreasonable search of their home for suspected copyright media. Not only does this risk the person’s privacy but that of the persons clients. If the ACTA / Bill c-61 group gains the power to enter a persons home and seize the equipment this now becomes a violation of section 8 and 7, in such a way that that persons home is being searched for something that will harm or has harmed no one, and violates the person’s privacy for what they are allowed to store on their own computer making the search both an invasion of privacy and unreasonable search of their home.
    Section 9: Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.
    While I was reading the original ACTA / Bill C-61 there was a term that came up called “ex parte” which translates to “On one side only” and in reference to this situation would mean that someone who was arrested for copyright materials would not allowed toretain council up arrest. This means that not only can this be considered a violation of section 9 where someone has been arrested or detained because they were supposedly downloading copyrighted material, but it could also be considered a violation of “Section 10: Everyone has the right on arrest or detention. Subsection B: To retain and instruct Counsel without delay and to be informed of that right” Meaning everyone has the right to a lawyer if they are arrested.
    It could also be considered a violation of Section 11: Any person charged with an offence has the right. Subsection D: to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal. But if ACTA / Bill C-61 were to have gone through it would be the exact opposite when in consideration arresting someone without a warrant or the ability to retain counsel is pretty much assuming they’re guilty and charging them.

  28. Anarchist Philanthrapist says:

    In regards to technology
    In regards to technology other than computers:
    The other thing I have notice is these new bills are no longer just concerned with downloading of copyright materials but have moved on to issues regarding CDs/DVDs/pictures and into cellular and smart phones as well. From what I read of the Bill C-61 when in regards to use and ownership of not only CDs/MP3s & DVDs / Digital movies was that you were going to have to own a copy for each person that wanted to watch or listen to it. That would mean that If I wanted to watch a movie in my room and my roommate wanted to watch the movie later on, even though I already own a copy, he would have to buy his own. This would be the same issue if I bought a CD, and wanted copies of the music on my CD, computer and mp3 player.
    As to how the bill seems to be worded I would have buy three copies for three devices. This would be great for the music industry but very hard on us consumers. In essence it’s the same for pictures and artwork.
    Now what really got my goat about this whole this bill is it’s movement into not only the aforementioned digital media but it’s being pushed onto cellular and smart phones. Now I guess this actually came at a bad time for me because I am currently in a disagreement with telus due to them not letting me take my old plans and smart phone on to the new network. But what not only ACTA/Bill C-61 would have done but this new DMCA does as well, will lock me out of unlocking my phone and taking it to another provider. This to me is not only unfair as it would force me to buy a new cellular / smart phone every time when I decided to change service providers it would force me to into possibly buying cellular and smart phones I don’t like and or am not interested in using, if the company was willing to take my old phone onto their network. In retrospect it would be like me tell you, that you can’t put a Ford engine in your Chevy car just because someone else has decided it’s not right and it won’t make Chevy any money, to me it seems like it’s all about making money and that seems more American than Canadian.

  29. A (less than) proud Canadian says:

    They are getting ready for acta
    I remember hearing something about how our goverment swore acta won’t change canadian law. I guess this is their answer to that, change canadian law ahead in preparation of acta so the laws don’t need to be changed when its here. The laws will have already been changed for it

  30. concerned says:

    @A (less than) proud Canadian

    true dat. I’m sitting in singapore – they said laws won’t really change that much but our internet speeds will slow down and costs will go up as more monitoring will be put in place. monitoring also means we have to be even more careful than people have to be even more cautious than they already are on what they do online – not just downloading –,-at-greater-cost?

  31. “As to how the bill seems to be worded I would have buy three copies for three devices.”

    If it comes to this sort of restriction…I simply won’t buy it. I know A LOT of people who of the same mind. The Industry will lose a ton of money if they implement an overly strict DMCA-style restrictions. I did this when they started trying to digitally “lock” CDs…I simply stopped buying them, even though I know there is a crack for this. It’s the principle of it. Owning the music is NOT that important to me that I will tollerate digital locks. Music has been designed to be portable…NOT locked in to one system…we might as well go back to vinyl in that case. And, I vehemently object with taking away of the right to make backups and play out-of-region DVDs…luckily I have a spare player in the closet. Doesn’t the Berne Convension protect us for out-of-region stuff which has never been released here?

  32. Hindgrinder says:

    @A (less than) proud Canadian RE: ACTA
    You may be onto something there….
    The negotiators and lobby groups have been pushing for completion of the talks THIS YEAR…
    So…tinfoil hat aside – good observation.

    HG – Online Activism – Registered with Elections Canada. MAFIAA – No Tresspassing.

  33. Scott Tribe says:

    What needs to be done.. the exact same thing the last time the Conservative government tried to pass a DMCA type law.. mobilize public opposition to it to force them to back off or modify the bill.

    The Conservatives are very sensitive to issues that may cause them a drop in support in the public opinion polls that threaten their desired goal of reaching a majority government.. so if there is a strong public outcry against these hinted at new measures, they’ll drop it like a sack of hot potatoes.

  34. Promoting Non-commercial Media
    With both the government and the corporate suppliers clearly against the voter-consumer, now, it is becoming obvious to me that, eventually, the only real choice will be to refrain from consuming any commercial media “products” whatsoever. My rationale is that if I(we) consume nothing they produce, then all the laws in the world won’t help them, legally or financially.

    Unfortunately, I am not all that familiar with amateur Canadian entertainment and its distribution. My notion of, say, an acting troupe putting on a play, is that it is something done once a week at the local rented hall, maybe a bigger national tour at the main theatre. I’m wondering if there is a national network of amateur actors &/or playwrights that are releasing a steady-cam recordings of their various performances?
    It had occurred to me, in recent years, that there was a niche to be filled in the increasingly antagonistic marketplace of digital media, that an opening may have been created for the small players to exploit. It seemed to me that a single camera, mounted to encompass the whole stage, would suffice in recording the work, would require a bare minimum of editing, would serve as free advertising to draw in local patrons, and potentially reach an entire group of online patrons (if a method to patronize the recording was available).
    The distribution method and infrastructure is already in place, but I think that a single independent troupe would have difficulty gaining a mindshare on the national psyche. A cooperative effort by several dozen groups across the country, though, all releasing through an aggregating website, would have a real shot at rooting themselves as a mainstay of Canadian culture, I think. I guess my thought was that, if the players were only making money off attendance to their plays, then distributing freely over the net using a patronage model would likely lead to greater income and notoriety, likely increase attendance. It seemed like a relevant endeavour, even before this new set of social controls was drawn up for the government, I suspect it will have even more traction if our elected representatives decide to allow them to start enforcing the rules as criminal behaviour.

    I am familiar with CaPT (, but it looks like an under-utilized resource, just yet. Is anyone aware if the above circumstance, or something similar (or with other media), is already being pursued? What are the non-commercial media options available to a Canadian?

  35. dismayed
    I’ve been gearing to migrate to Canada. Politics in my country has pissed me off big time that migration is the option I’m taking. I’ve grown weary witnessing politics rape my country dry. Now, news like this about Canada (and they’re increasing) makes me shake my head.

  36. Laughable
    They come up with the rules and laws, and there are rules and laws already in effect by Canada’s supreme court. Keep it up boys and girls, keep contradicting yourselves on the worlds grand stage of politics, the six thousand dollar suits you buy with Canadian Tax Payer money will eventually strangle you in your sleep aiding in your own asphyxiation on the silk sheets you sleep on.

  37. internet surfer says:

    copywrite is censorship, censorship is NOT copywrite
    JAMES! watch yourself: Taken from the freenet FAQ

    What about child porn, offensive content or terrorism?
    While most people wish that child pornography and terrorism did not exist, humanity should not be deprived of their freedom to communicate just because of how a very small number of people might use that freedom.

    I don’t want my node to be used to harbor child porn, offensive content or terrorism. What can I do?
    The true test of someone who claims to believe in Freedom of Speech is whether they tolerate speech which they disagree with, or even find disgusting. If this is not acceptable to you, you should not run a Freenet node.

  38. Hindgrinder says:

    Terrrorrrrrrism & kiddie pr0n – these things are NOT CONNECTED. Wake up.
    If you seriously wanted to make a difference here – you would educate parents and teach them to use the tools available to monitor their children on the internet. In a society where we use TV as a babysitter – we can’t treat the internet the same way. It’s too open and 2-way. TV is 1-way – it doesn’t talk back to you. When you talk terrorism I put on a tinfoil hat.
    False flags are so 2011 – i have to wonder what kinda distraction it will take to make regular people think ACTA or this upcoming copyfight bill are in the public best interests.

    HG – Best Copyfight Trolls That Money Can’t Buy

  39. Mr. Dressup says:

    Seems ministers were playing good cop bad cop when the thing has already been decided on and writte by America.

    Consultations be damned.

  40. Folks, Canada is not a democracy. Think chessboard, the queen is Elizabeth, King is Rothschild, bishop- Pope, knight, rook- military, etc but the Pawns are ‘world leaders’, no power. Harper is a pawn in the game.

  41. Peter Cohen says:

    A contrarian perspective
    The vast majority of the public obviously opposes anti-piracy measures. This of course means in most instances, they support piracy. The vast majority of people think absolutely nothing about downloading anything and everything they want for free off the Internet, and they do not like the idea of government doing anything to make it more difficult for them to take whatever they want. The vast majority of the posters here fit my above description. If the vast majority of people supported slavery, that would not make it right. If the vast majority of people supported deporting all the Jews, that would not make it right. And if the vast majority of people support trespassing upon my intellectual property, that doesn’t make it right either.

    I used to make my living creating video content. I employed several people. I used to sell hundreds of copies of my creations for a reasonable price. Then came piracy. The last video I created sold five copies, one of the people who bought it uploaded it to a fileshare network and I have not sold a single copy since. Needless to say, I am out of business, the people who used to work for me are unemployed, and the pirates must now content themselves with sharing only my old work, they will never be able to see any new content from me and my crew. Piracy kills that which it would steal.

    Yes, some professional content can survive using other means of capitalization. But that typically has to be the lowest common denominator sort of material in order to garner the largest possible audience. Barely 5% of artists today could survive in a world where they must work for free. If the pirates have their way, the day may come where the only media content will be reality TV and amateur YouTube content.

  42. Indie vs Big Label
    I’ve said this many times and perhaps I’m being paranoid. I seriously think the entertainment, and the recording industry in particular, are scared to death. What I think they’re secretly trying to do is gain control of the media technology. Why? Well, for two resons.

    ** Think about it, for every band that gets signed, there are at least 1000 that are still struggling and trying to make end’s meat. Now, it’s quickly getting to a point, where any remotely savvy artist can set up a small studio in the back yard, record and album and sell it on the Internet, all for relatively low cost…independent of big labels, AND it potentially has all the same coverage and exposure to all the same customers. The creates a lot of competition AND the independent can sell music for much less than the big labels and still make money…hell, pretty much anything sold is making money. If the industry controls the technology and force devices to have some sort of manditory DRM-type technology, they can force Independents down the same path. Now if they make the same DRM tech rediculously expensive with anual licensing fees…competion problem solved.

    ** The second scenerio I think scares the hell out of the recording industry involved already signed and established artists. When on-line sales really take off and becomes the majority of music sales, why would established artists pay huge dollars to the big labels to sell their music on-line, when they can do it themselves and reap ALL the profit. Unless the industry gains control of the technology, you’re going to see a lot of established artists jumping ship as soon as their contracts end and essentially becoming independent…see point 1.

    I’m telling you, underneath all the copyright blames and finger pointing it’s all about the industry trying to gain control of the technology to continue to make it difficult for independents to make a living. If independents can consistently make a living, then theree’s no need of big labels….they essentially become obsolite.

    I don’t care what anyone says, this legislation does nothing but hurt a vast majority of recording artists, especially new and emerging artists. Only the “Metallica”s and “U2″s of the world stand to gain substancially from this legislation.

    There is a very successful band called Primus. Early on, back in the mid-late 90’s, they started noticing a lot of black-market pirate recording of their live concerts. Their answer to this was to get a hold of them and put them up on their web site. For a long time these pirate recordings were provided free, more recently they’ve started charging for them, but a clever way to stem the problem non-the-less.

    We need inovation and forward thinking not supression…actually this is even worse than supression, this is regression…a step back in an attempt for a dinosaur to avoid extinction.

  43. Nice try, Peter
    Consumer unhappiness on the proposed bill has nothing to do with piracy, and everything to do with acceptable practices (like format shifting) being perceived as piracy (which it shouldn’t).

    I strongly recommend you reread the comments, you’ve clearly only heard what you wanted to hear.

  44. Tuld U So says:

    @anyone who voted for the Harper cabal and would be upset by such a law:
    It serves you xxxdamned right. Maybe next time you’ll actually look into the (lack of) character of those for whom you vote BEFORE you vote.

    Better yet, please stay home on election day and let the adults cast the ballots.

  45. @Peter Cohen: As “…” put it, this has NOTHING to do with getting rid of copyright, or supporting piracy. There are few, of those who post here who are contrary to a DMCA-style law, who want the artists to starve… There is practically no one here who would argue that uploading a copyrighted work to a file sharing site should be legal. Heck, the Americans are the MOST anti-governmental intervention people I know of; and who is it that is trying to push DMCA?

    What the vast majority of the people here are against is the indiscriminate use of a sledgehammer to kill a fly. That is, the rights of the consumer to format shift, etc, for personal use. Note here, and read carefully, the restriction in my previous statement: “for personal use”. By this I mean for the use of those in the household who would normally have access to the media. Making copyrighted material available of others is a different beast altogether.

    In the case of software, this also means (to me) that, if you buy one license for a piece of software, you are permitted to move that license when the hardware fails to another computer, in particular if the license was not printed on the packaging so the consumer could make an informed decision. I deal with software business wise which costs thousands of dollars per seat. It is in the interest of the software publisher to allow this transfer; if I had to repurchase because of a hardware failure or an IP address change, they wouldn’t get my business, even if they are the cheapest.

  46. some people haven’t figured it out, but digital music, film, books, etc have a value of approximately Zero, based on exponentially increasing supply of files. with hundreds of millions of files on millions of devices only an moronic despot would try and criminalize this as ‘piracy’. Harper fits that description.

  47. RE: Nice try, Peter
    “Consumer unhappiness on the proposed bill has nothing to do with piracy, and everything to do with acceptable practices (like format shifting) being perceived as piracy (which it shouldn’t).”

    Agreed, and it doesn’t help the situtation if you try to force consumers in to a situation they’re not comfortable with or unhappy with, whether it’s illegal or not. All this achieves is to alienate the consumer and in many cases drives them further underground. After all the efforts and law suits in the US, piracy is higher than ever there. What’s this tell you? It tells me that the current business model does not support the current need and needs to evolve.

  48. Well
    What can you expect the artists like Mr.Cohen to understand the complexity of C61/Canadian DMCA. As long as they are the one to make the profit and no one else. They are happy.

    When the economic crisis hit us in couple years ago, some people or the vast majority are still recovering from the previous economic crisis. So they barely make a living, some people even get lay off from their high paid job and work like 2-3 jobs to sustain themselves or the family. They have no extra money to buy music or movies from the store.

    An album cost like 15 $ to 20$ a piece. I can use that money to buy 2 medium pizza to feed my family for couple of days. Why should I use that money to paid you while watching my family to starve?

    It is tactically unfeasible to our finance.

  49. Peter Cohen says:

    Ok, I was wrong to lump everyone in the same boat and I am guilty of reading into this what I expected. I have absolutely no issues with people format shifting my work. I have formally stated in several places in the past, that anyone purchasing a license to my work has every right to make a backup copy and to view it on whatever media they prefer. I have even told people explicitly that they have the right to use small extracts of my work for their own purposes, not just for review, including giving it away for free as long as they keep it small and give me credit.

    But then while I acknowledge the error of my lumping everyone into the same pirate camp, we have the poster Ian writing; “Digital music, film, books, etc have a value of approximately Zero, based on exponentially increasing supply of files. with hundreds of millions of files on millions of devices only an moronic despot would try and criminalize this as ‘piracy’.

    And that makes my point. It is that very piracy that threatens to render all “Digital music, film, books, etc” to a value of zero, whereupon no such art would be made. All new art would be amateur only. Artists will be required to get weekend jobs at McDonalds so that during the week they may toil (and pay whatever costs of their art out of their McDonalds wages) so that Ian and others can take their work for free. Obviously this is bad and wrong, and hence, it ‘is’ criminal.

    Ian would likely counter that he has taken nothing from the artist because the art, being composed of bits, was simply copied, not taken. What has been taken from the artist is not the art, it is the right of the artist to earn a living from their labor and investment. It is rightly a crime not so much of theft, as it is rather trespass. It is a trespass upon the property of the artist’s mind, their intellectual property. The fact that the art is easily copyable with bits is an inconvenience for property law, not a justification for it not being property. The art is the product of the artist’s labor and capital. The fact that atoms were not involved does not negate the right of the artist to control how their property is used.

  50. Anonymous Coward says:

    Artists will be replaced by robots in the future. Amateur robots at that! Hey, remember when copyright didn’t exist and art was still made.

  51. @Peter Cohen
    “I used to make my living creating video content. I employed several people. I used to sell hundreds of copies of my creations for a reasonable price. Then came piracy.”

    The only thing law will do at this point in time is piss off even further the main source of income for creative talent, and basically prove to the Canadian People that their government isn’t listening to them. That’s a very dangerous slope to take, on the premisie of breaking out wine and cheese on failures such as yourself. You’re lucky the Canadian public showed some sympathy of your position in the copyright consultation, considering what kind of reputation your industry has globally. Move that global reputation into Canada with law, and the only thing you have served to do is erode any and all sympathy for the creator groups

    Reforms haven’t worked in other countries. Law isn’t the answer, it’s part of it. Where reform has been present, innovation still isn’t present the way it should be to increase the amount of creators pay cheques, and virtually nothing is deterring the use of the P2P networks a broad.

    Your problem has nothing to do with piracy, it has to do with a failure and responsibility you had to your company and employees to adapt and innovate around the market. You failed in some of the basic principles of entrepreneurship, and I hope to god that the Conservatives do not reward you for failure. Learn from it rather than blaming others for your problems. If you can’t do that, than you don’t belong running any business in any industry at all in my view.

  52. Peter Cohen says:

    Taking exception
    @Jason K
    It is quite possible that I am a candle maker bemoaning the development of the light bulb. But it is highly insulting and frankly outrageous that you should intimate that the candle maker is an incompetent failure because he was unable to sell candles.

    The ‘market’ that artists have to adapt to is one in which they cannot sell their art. If they try, they will find themselves in competition with their own art, being given away for free, illegally I might add. An artist’s inability to earn a living when their art is now free does not make them a failure as an artist.

    In the future, there will still be professional artists. They will be getting donations due to their highly innovative YouTube videos. There will be a far smaller number of professional artists and they will be making very simple art. The day shall come when the likely of Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings movies are a nostalgic memory and that the only ‘professional’ movies being made will be the ones made by governments with tax money. ‘Triumph of the Will’ anybody?

  53. @Peter
    I think Ian is more the exception here and that most would agree some form of protection is warranted, but not draconian, backward stepping laws that aim to halt progress and put way too much power in to the hands of private companies. The idea that with this legislation a private company could force my ISP to give them information about my usage without having to justify it in front of a judge to get a warrant scares me. In Canada it’s supposed to be inocent until proven guity. Actions invading privacy should not be allowed, not solely on the “assumption of guilt” by a private company. Private companies should not dictate law.

    As I’ve said, and I think most here would agree with me, I personally have have no problem paying and I buy a lot at and average of 20 movies a month plus whatever music my wife wants downloaded. But there are a number of serious problems I have with the legislation.

    **I do think a digital copy of a movie or music should cost substancially less than a hard copy since for years the industry claimed a “large” portion of the cost was the printed packaging and shipping to retailers. Talk the talk, walk the walk.

    **I also think the idea of not being able to make back-ups and copies for personal use is rediculous and won’t buy anything with any digital locks that enforce it. Where is my right to protect my investment? In the case of a fire, my house insurance will cover my 1000+ dvd collection and 500+ CD collection, but it won’t cover my purchased MP3 collection, only computer the hardware. Software protection currently must come in the form of off-site back-ups.

    **I think the idea of not being allowed to record a TV show so you don’t miss it is rediculous. Speaks for itself.

    **As someone who enjoys foreign movies and, due to where I work, have friends from all over the world, I think the idea of making out-of-region DVDs and DVD players illegal is rediculous. There is so much out there that is not available and will likely never be available here.

  54. @Peter Cohen
    “But it is highly insulting and frankly outrageous that you should intimate that the candle maker is an incompetent failure because he was unable to sell candles.”

    A successful business person and someone with market experience wouldn’t be responding with such emotion as you have with respect to the above statement. Emotion clouds judgment. The creative arts are “emotional” arts so I forgive you for that one, but this emotion is what’s causing a lot of issues with moving forward with innovation, and future jobs within all sectors. Think long and hard about that.

    “The ‘market’ that artists have to adapt to is one in which they cannot sell their art.”

    Not true, do your market research. There’s also ample proof this is not the case from several independent researchers, and within not just our own Governments research in this area, but several other governments around the globe also agree that’s not the case. It’s the lack of innovation in area’s where selling is happening, even within updated and reformed copyright laws, that a major source of that misconception with respect to file sharing. If you have done your market research properly, you would know this to be the case. Again, I wouldn’t have you running any business. You don’t belong at the top, nor do you have a right in my point of view to be discussing the future of your industry!

  55. a work of art has a life of it’s own after it leaves the artist. the artist must relinquish his art to mankind. digital made copyright absolutely obsolete.

  56. @Peter Cohen
    I’ll post this in this thread too:

    Chair Of The Featured Artist Coalition Explains File Sharing Isn’t Going Away; Artists Need To Innovate

  57. exploder says:

    @Peter Cohen
    I think Jason K goes way too far in his blind criticism of you. You have my sympathy with regards to your lost business through piracy, it’s a real shame.

    What I see very few people mention, and it relates very directly to the discussion, is this idea:

    How do you compete against free? How about delivering things that free *stolen* media can’t. Some examples that seem to be working, at least to some degree:

    – first principle: digital makes doing everything MUCH cheaper, both stealing and promoting

    – use the cheap / free promotion. Engage your audience through a whole new universe of 2-way communication. Forums, YouTube, blogs, etc.. Now way more people want your stuff and will want to get it somehow.

    – use the increased demand to drop your prices radically. Still not free, but getting super cheap, you can now compete with piracy for convenience and legitimacy. IE, customers pay very minimum price for the real thing, in a one stop shop straight from the creator.

    – this whole climate, especially through improved communications, puts us at a point where honest mutual respect can come into play between artists and customers. try a “donate now” button, or a “choose your price + donation + split” button, where the customer pays what they want, and chooses what percentage goes to you vs. a charity (which you chose). The big magic here is customers feel like they are doing something worthy. They make the effort to ask themselves honestly (possibly for the first time, and with no gun to their heads) what they really think your product is worth, and are more likely to be appreciative, generous and honest. Google “humble bundle” for a recent and amazing example of this, it made $1.3m in a few weeks just recently, with the majority to the vendors, the rest to charity, and all voluntarily (min price was 1 cent).

    – in an age of direct marketing straight to enthusiastic and appreciative customers, you can afford to offer them better offerings. A DVD + BlueRay, with a nice set of printed notes and extra info. Something better than fits in a normal disk based distribution channel. And you can do it at much higher margins, so you make more even at lower end prices. And you can still appeal to the honest relationship, reveal the pricing/profit structure, so customers can feel they are not wasting their money on asshole cokehead fatcat middlemen.

    I know these aren’t all perfect solutions, it doesn’t add up to guaranteed success. But these kinds of new opportunities are making livings for real people, genuinely offsetting the real downside of piracy. And the barriers to entry in this new marketplace are lower than ever.

    So Peter, I suggest you take the wisdom you have learned from your experience, and put yourself back on the market in a new way. If you do it right, you will get to enjoy a whole new level of intimacy with the people who love your work, and maybe more of them than you could ever possible reach before. Other people are doing it, it’s possible. Unless it’s porn, then all bets are off.

  58. Corporate Oligarchy can suck my sweaty balls
    These fools think their money gives them power. But they fail to notice that with the internet as glue, their job is only mismanagement. Techies now hold all the keys. We will not let the fascist assholes win. If pushed hard enough, geeks united have the real power to make all these laws a permanently moot point. And believe me, this sick law thrust upon a happy and relaxed Canada, will be galvanizing in direct proportion to its violating rape of our digital rights. We techies may have been sitting happy on our asses to the largest extent, but gloves will come off, and the creeps behind these laws will get exactly what they deserved.

    Modern PC’s, fast internet, and perfect encryption. We have the power to make unstoppable tools, and will gain the resolve to build and deploy them. We may have been too lazy to bother yet, it was a free and easy technological infancy for all, but that’s not going to last long at this rate. Luckily, there is no way to win this war for the side trying to sell us on how much our computer’s can’t do, because moar is what we will always want, not less.

  59. How Do You Compete Agaisnt Free?
    Simple, you don’t.

    When I was a kid we didn’t have a lot of money for books. That’s OK, we could borrow books for free from the public library.

    I’ve spent a good part of my adult life chasing down books I’d read free from the library. Sometimes they’re out of print, so lucky there are used book stores. Some I’ve bought at list price. Because i prefer the hardcover format, that’s what I get if I have a choice. If all there is is paperback I’ll buy it, and when I eventually find the hardback version I’ll give away the paperback. For authors I like who are alive and writing now, I’ll buy their books new when they are released. Even though I could wait and probably get a steeply discounted version from Chapters later, I don’t. Because I know if I want the writer to keep writing books that will entertain or inform me, they need to make a living. If its’ good, people will pay. Willingly. Gladly.

    That’s why copyright began. So that talented artists didn’t spend their days digging ditches when they could be better employed writing “A Christmas Carol”.

    When I was a kid we listened to music for free on the radio.
    That’s how you learn what you like. That’s how you know what records to buy. We used to make compilations of our favorite records onto cassettes. But
    I won’t buy music I’ve not heard. Since I haven’t found anything to listen to on the radio in many years, I’d stopped even listening. In 20 years I’ve heard exactly one song on the radio that I cared about enough to go out and buy it. So mostly I’d stopped buying new music too. Oh, when my favorite Paul Simon cassette wore out I replaced it— with a used CD. In the last couple of years I have discovered some new musicians from seeing them perform live, then bought their CDs. From them.

    When I was a kid we watched shows and movies on television for free.
    And in fact I still do. Haven’t had cable in years though. I’ve seen a couple of good new shows at other people’s houses but but enough to be paying whatever horrendous price cable costs. I think we were paid something like $50 a month and only watching about 2 hours a week for the privilege when we packed it in. With the money I don’t spend on cable I can afford to buy DVDs. Now I buy DVD sets. Right now I’m working my way through Alfred Hitchcock Season 2. It’s older than I am– from the days when there were *gasp* 39 episodes in a season and only a few commercials. Alfred Hitchcock made complaining about them great. Unfortunately the commercials aren’t included with the shows.

    Funny thing is, I used to be a media junkie. But reading about a girl spending 2 nights in jail for making a 4 minute video of her sister’s birthday at a movie theatre promoting having birthday parties there… well, is copyright worth that? Somehow, I’m just not very inclined to want to see movies made by corporations that treat people like that.

    I did buy some merchandise from Nina Paley though, because I loved her creative commons licensed animated feature film “Sita Sings the Blues”. You probably will too.

  60. @exploder
    The criticism of I’ve posed with respect to Mr. Cohen is completely justified. I agree with a lot of your points with respect to competing with free, and how business models must change. It’s been 10 years, and those who are not moving forward even when reform has been present, do not deserve any sympathy or positions in this debate. Those that don’t understand the marketplace should not be allowed to continue business in their said industries, and we shouldn’t be basing our economic policies on failed business approaches. That sets my generation (post boomer) up to fix a huge mess economically.

    Developing laws based on emotional, moral and ideological responses will only serve to cause further economic damage to these industries, because the economic problems are not being actively tackled, and even worse, law becomes irrelevant, and unenforceable. We should be discussing alternative business models at this time, but Mr. Cohen’s approach with respect to the emotional debate and blaming the market for his problems and unemployment (thus isolating the main source of income for his industry) is taking center stage with respect to government influence over legislation. The economic problems are not being dealt with as a result, thus failure and a leveling off of innovation will continue.

    The future has already been written, and the writing is already on the wall. Either adapt, or disappear, regardless of reform. We shouldn’t be interfering with this process. We should allow the future industry leaders and innovators to set the agenda with respect to policy, not those who are in denial, and have failed for over a decade and blame this failure on the culture and society it serves.

  61. RE: Exploder’s sweaty balls rant
    As crass, albeit entertaining, as this sounds, Exploder makes a valid point. Tech has ALWAYS stayed way ahead of the curve when it comes to stuff like this. With innovations such as FreeNet and Tor, in all reality, how far away do they think widely available completely untraceable Internet is? Once it becomes untraceable, the industry loses everything….all bargaining power. I’ve been harping on it for weeks, the industry has to adapt adapt adapt, or it will die!! If they think they’re going to bring down the underground tech, they are sorrily mistaken. History has proven this time and time again, the tech will evolve to circumvent any security or copy protection measures they put in place. I don’t mind paying for my media and even don’t want to see the industry die as it’s not just the execs that will suffer, although they should be boiled in their silk sheets, I just want the same fair use access to my stuff as I always have had.

    Persecution and prosecution DO NOT WORK!!! The industry needs to work WITH the consumers not against them. Most of the consumers downloading music are not bad people and probably don’t even consider the fact that their actions are illegal, after all illegal activities on the Internet must be more difficult. YES, some people are that naive, in fact, in my experience, a lot of people are that naive. File sharing has become second nature to our culture.

  62. exploder says:

    @ Jason K

    “… nor do you have a right in my point of view to be discussing the future of your industry!”

    “Those that don’t understand the marketplace should not be allowed to continue business in their said industries…”

    These are the two statements you made that were over the line as far as I’m concerned. You have every right to make them of course, ON PRINCIPLE, whoever you are. I agree strongly with almost everything you said, it’s true, and an accurate view of the inevitability of our technological revolution in all its true glory. But be careful with language like this.

    First, everyone needs the right to chime in on this discussion, everyone. That’s exactly why this law is so gross, it’s made in spite of open public input. Second, “allowed” by who exactly? The market will be the judge of fools, nothing but their own lack of ability to stay in the game needs to “allow” or disallow them to stay in business. Using phrases like “should not be allowed” is a wee bit daft for people fighting for freedom, unless it’s directly with respect to making bad laws at the whim of corporate greed.

    Finally, I think it’s prudent to be kind to the little folks who have lost in these markets. I am willing to grant them some respect, sympathy, and kindness. They probably worked plenty hard enough to deserve it, even if they missed the express train and got lost in history. Candle makers worked hard, and if they didn’t want to start making light bulbs, don’t hate on them when they shed the odd bitter tear for their lost era. In fact be thankful they shuffled away to become sad janitors instead, and let the future happen in spite of them. We only need to insult them if they seriously and doggedly try to ban light bulbs.

    Instead, it’s Better to seduce and help them into the future if we can, where there is more potential for them than ever before, than insult/ridicule them until they hate what has become and side with the Big Media Fascist Dinosaurs. They probably still have plenty of great talents too, which are worth not throwing away if we can salvage them.

    I know peter started off pretty bitter, but the guy has some genuine humility, and probably some real talent if he built a business at all. I would rather be nice, and hope he can join us in wanting a chance for the little guy including his future self, which will be crushed by the kind of perverse policy most of come here to protest.


  63. @exploder
    I personally find the term “pirate” that’s used to describe people who access content through a new medium and distribution channels to be quite misrepresenting of the lack of understanding economics at play.

    The internet can not be tightly controlled as the media industries once had. The net was build by the US military specifically with orders to resist any control over the network since this network was being used to communicate with US military hardware and software. If control were to be imposed on the network, than the traffic will reroute to other area’s of the net where control isn’t present. It’s a never ending cycle and how this network was built. We must accept this before moving forward, and the best more recent depiction of this is with the Iran situation on twitter last year, and how the government of Iran was unsuccessful in blocking “content” from reaching the outside world with respect to the democratic protests that occurred in that country.

  64. youtube
    Bah, Peter Cohen, how many distributors did you have for your movies? Prop it on youtube, and you have a potential 4 billion people watching these things. In return, you get advertisement dollars. Not enough? No biggy, sell a high def version for a dollar or two. Out of 4 billion people, it only takes a small fraction of them to make you a million. Still not enough, sell the copy for five bucks a peice, but add the making of commentary, and a how to produce your own version. Something along those lines. Maybe even a peice of paper saying Authenticated artist supporter or something. Only takes 200 thousand out of 4 billion. The only people who loose are the traditinal labels who focused way too much on controlling distribution methods instead of supporting, marketing and promoting. A lable could still make money of artists. If they act like agents, take a small cut of total gross and in return, promote, market and open up new methods of disctrubtin, fine. But right now, this law is about protecting those distribution companies, not protecting you, the artists. Had you discoverd this blog befor your company went under, maybe we could of given you ideas on how to meet this digital new world. Unfortunatly, big media would rather you not know about this type of blog. Sorry about your buisness. It’s still not too late to play the youtube card or retry the video creation game.

  65. btrussell says:

    Just because I make a movie, it should not guarantee that I am a successful artist.
    Sales will tell me how successful I am or if I am even an artist.

  66. cndcitizen says:

    Candle Makers Survived
    @Peter Cohen
    “It is quite possible that I am a candle maker bemoaning the development of the light bulb. But it is highly insulting and frankly outrageous that you should intimate that the candle maker is an incompetent failure because he was unable to sell candles.”

    The ones that adapted to consumer change created a new marked for candles and made candles smell nice instead of just being used for light.

    I believe there still is a law in the books in my city that says horses and buggies have the right away on any street and motorizes cars are not allowed to honk their horns as it might upset the horse and buggy.

    That must have been someone”s attempt at preventing the motorized vehicle from gaining popularity to protect the horse and buggy industry….Industries adapt…or at least most of them do. The ones that don’t adapt try and create laws to keep them proped up.

    Just look at all the industries that have had to re-invent themselves with the simple arrival of flight. Train Makers, Cross Atlantic ocean vesels, ship yards, airports, regulators, etc.

    One small thing, like flight, affected millions and millions of people, it just took decades for those changes to take effect. With the changes that have been happening in the last decades, some industries have not stayed with the changes and are now trying to fill sand backs at the foot of a dam to prevent it from breaking flooding a city….instead of just draining the dam slowly and not effecting the city at all…except for the loss of power that they dam used to create….wow what an analogy…loss of power that the industry used to have in controlling perception and peoples entertainment.

  67. I urge everyone here to send your own letter or go to the website bellow and send of letters to the gov’t takes 1-2mins.
    ” Disgruntled said:

    Quick & easy way to voice your displeasure about this
    Via the letter writing wizard put together by the Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights:

  68. were all screwed!
    If this bill goes thru about 83% of the population will be charged! Good time to be a lawyer!

  69. iTunes
    Looking on iTunes Store, I’m noticing the pricing. I appreciate the fact they’re offering all this stuff for download, but it’s expensive. $20 for a new movie? At this cost, I might as well buy a physical copy off Amazon since it’s about the same price. Older movies are cheaper, but so are the physical copies. $3.50 for a single TV episode? C’mon, it doesn’t cost that much to buy the season pack. Digital is cheaper to produce, costs very little to distribute and is available to vastly more customers, it’s should be cheaper to buy.

  70. Long Live Democracy
    2010: The year of the death of democracy.

  71. All i Can say is
    James Moore is pulling a Mulroney.

  72. cndcitizen says:

    iTune vs Wal-Mart/Rogers discount bin
    @IamMe – ITunes

    I checked out iTunes a long time ago (prior to them being available in Canada) and ended up buying a couple of CD’s from PureTracks. We had so many problems with the DRM on PureTracks we had to rip the DRM off the digital files just to play the tracks we purchased. It was the last time we ever purchased any music or movie media online (except for physical delivery from Chapters or Amazon). Now we just wait until Wal-Mart or Rogers has a movie bin sale and pick up movies for $2-3 a piece. We don’t need the first run or the need to see on opening night anymore and would never pay $3.50 for a digital copy of a TV show when we just spent $500 on a PVR which I have just learned how to backup on external HD/DVD/mdeia server so I can watch them on my laptop when I travel…which under ACTA would make it illigal.

  73. What day next week?


  74. Anarchist Philanthrapist says:

    Do you people NEVER read other posts??

    ” How Do You Compete Agaisnt Free?”

    you use the words

    “That’s why copyright began. So that talented artists didn’t spend their days digging ditches when they could be better employed writing “A Christmas Carol”. ”

    The irony of that statement is so amazing. The reason we have publishing houses in NorthAmerica is because they wanted to escape persecution in England and Ireland for printing copyrighted works without paying the artists. So really the irony would be that, Louis Carol would still be digging the proverbial ditch.

    Now it’s companies like these publishing houses that are trying to help copyright laws. Anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?

  75. How many jobs will this cost?
    If I want to watch movies and TV shows on my iPod, I have two options. I can either buy the DVDs from HMV or other brick and mortar stores and use software on my computer to encode the program onto my computer, or I can download the movie from iTunes.
    One employs Canadian workers to ring up the sale and bag the purchase, the other, to my knowledge, employs no Canadians to encode and upload the tracks. If I want the greatest flexibility for my viewing options (while not being labeled a criminal), I will likely buy from iTunes so I can watch on my computer and iPod and even hook the iPod up to the TV to watch on a bigger screen. I will have no use for DVDs, especially if they are DRM’d to prevent the encoding.

    Retailers that deal in products that can be digitized but that do not offer a digital version will suffer losses as consumers choose to go the ‘most flexibile and legal’ route. I don’t suppose that Moore & Clement have thought about that.

  76. Anonymous Coward says:

    Hollywood was created in trying to escape patents on the movie picture camera. “Various producers and filmmakers moved bases from the east coast to escape punitive licensing from the Motion Picture Patents Company.”

    Hollywood was born out of piracy.

  77. cndcitizen says:

    “Hollywood was born out of piracy.”

    Actually that is patent infringment, not copyright infrigment(code named Piracy)

  78. RE: How many jobs will this cost?
    Often, the unfortunate fallout of progress is downsizing and job loss causing workers to have to retool. This has been the case since the middle ages, the printing press put many “scribes” out of work, the industrial revolution and the age of steam put many factory workers out of work, robotics and automation put even more factory workers out of work, automated tellers in stores put more people out of work, I could go on and on about how pretty much any invention was created to either downsize work force or directly make money. Unfortunately, it’s these labor-oriented, repetitive style of jobs which are generally easiest to automate, making that sector the most vunerable to be affected by change. Progress rolls on and in this case people will have to adapt. I don’t blame business for this. No matter how the industry tries, sooner or later most of the business will move on-line and many store workers will lose their jobs…it’s an inevitable effect of technological progress.

  79. Anarchist Philanthrapist says:

    RE: How many jobs will this cost?
    To be honest the cost of this bill is not going to be jobs no matter what anyone says. The cost of this bill is going to be the loss of our rights and freedoms. Please read my post earlier about this law violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

  80. @exploder
    If we end up with law that is based purely on emotions and ideology rather than economic fact, all I can say is the fact I’ve been pretty polite to Mr. Cohen compared to what’s headed not only his way but with our elected officials as well.

    While I agree with your assessment of Mr. Cohen, the copyright consultations are now over. All positions are on the table, and if Mr. Cohen was following the consultation process or even economic data, he wouldn’t have entered into this blog carrying on about how we are all “pirates”.

    Don’t bother helping this crowd anymore, we’ve all done what we can before, during and after the consultation process. If they are still not listening, let them burn. It looks like that may need to happen for force change in this industry economically. No one is doing any good at this point in the debate defending anyone from failed businesses. Sometimes a bit of tough love is needed to eradicate the stupidity left by those who blame their unemployment on society, rather than accepting failure, learning from it, and moving on. These people don’t deserve sympathy, advice, nor credibility.

  81. do you know what a psychopath is? it’s someone who sends our young patriots into an illegal ‘war of choice’, brings them home in boxes with their heads blown off. then, says to himself ‘ gee, i better get my piano chops in shape, i gotta’ perform ‘with a little help form my friends’ with yo yo ma tonight’
    that’s a psychopath

  82. @a.martin
    Well, I send the letter to them already but I doubt the letter will be prove any usefulness this time ever since the government have ignore the copyrights consultation from the previous year.

  83. end user says:

    Artists working
    @ Peter Cohen > Barely 5% of artists today could survive in a world where they must work for free. If the pirates have their way, the day may come where the only media content will be reality TV and amateur YouTube content.

    Oh yah strange how artists who own their own copyrights are the ones with money made by touring and through music they own. It’s not our fault someone sold their rights to a music label and now they are in debt to the record label for the next 5 albums.

    My last job I worked as a web designer. After several years I realized I hit my limit of what I was able to learn and I wasn’t able to meet my employers demands. I moved to another industry totally unrelated to the last one. 7 years later after lots of hard work I make WAAAAYYY more money they I ever could have as a web designer.

    Yup I’m saying if you can’t make it composing/playing music its time to move on.

  84. It’s funny how people still believe that if the cartels just embrace the internet and fair dealing, they’ll make the same money or more money than ever before. The truth is you do not understand their business, so you try to appease them with levy schemes and basically apologize for their attacks by offering unmonopolistic alternatives.

    The ultimate goal for any business is a monopoly on the market. Before internet distribution began, the entertainment cartels had this virtual monopoly. Now, anyone can make music or film inexpensively can use the internet for even cheaper distribution. DRMs and the DMCA are very important to the cartels because this is their way of embracing technology, their way of evolving. The cartels’ racket is trying to sell you pieces of plastic discs you already paid for, except in a different format and colour. Thus, the cartels will not accept fair dealing nor adopt an unmonopolistic business model.

    Currently, they’d rather bribe a few politicians for a pittance than lose the virtual monopoly worth billions. The cartels play this game to win; and the winner takes all in this game. This is why you see cartel members coming here to attack fair dealing, claim copyright was created for them, and emotionally argue their baseless case, in which no court of law would accept.

    Canadians spoke loudly and clearly last summer during the Copyright Consulation, but we’re being ignored. Most will see democracy is dead; and indeed it was long ago. However, death means a better beginning will emerge. Let’s all have a party to celebrate this new and the most draconian copyright law in Canada, if not in the world. There will be more “most draconian” copyright laws to come, so invite all of your family and friends to those parties.

    Remember, the more we laugh together, the better the results we can expect! We are the public, afterall!


  85. Crockett says:

    Time to petition the opposition
    This is still a minority government, if this legislation stinks too much maybe the three opposition parties will group to defeat it. I can see the NDP not going along (if Charlie speaks loud enough), the Libs may just oppose it as they have recently spoke against being too heavy handed. That leaves the Bloc, who may or may not. Who can ever figure out what they will do? Anyways letters to opposition MPs may be more effective than the Conservatives.

  86. I think the biggest issue right now is that there is a huge lack of innovation occurring even in places where reform is present, and due to this, I think there’s more of a risk of people logging off the digital marketplace completely, which will be really bad for not just the entertainment cartels, but the online marketplace in general.

    If Canadians feel their voices have not been heard, especially with the Conservative government who seems to trip up every time they reach 34% in the polls, I have every faith that the Canadian people will let our politicians know what to do with the bill, and their respected leadership. We’re not the US where we sit on our hands when our political leaders fail to listen to it’s people, and act in ways that seem to suggest wide spread corruption. We actually do something about it.

    The Conservative party seems to have nine lives when it comes to upsetting the people and getting away with it. I wonder how many lives are left, is any. Huge gamble to be ignoring public input, won’t go over well at all with the public, nor will any attempts to “spin” it.

  87. “We’re not the US where we sit on our hands when our political leaders fail to listen to it’s people, and act in ways that seem to suggest wide spread corruption. We actually do something about it. ”

    Here in the US we protested in the streets, until they established “free speech zones” conveniently located miles from the cameras, then, speaking of those cameras, they made sure news organizations aggregated to the point they could meet with the owners in a bathroom stall to plot their spin.

    Those of us who understand what is going on are still doing something about it. We are ignoring an illegitimate government’s deplorable actions through civil disobedience.

  88. cndcitizen says:

    Future of Patent and Copyright
    Thought experiment. I was out tonight and was thinking about the current laws and how they would apply to Star Trek…(no I am not a trecker but have watched the show). What brought this on was the replicator technology (you know the thing that makes everything from toothpaste to whatever). I was thinking…was star trek so far advanced that they forsaw the failure or patent and copy right laws, or were they just ignoring them.

    For example, in almost every episode you see one of the characters “creating” some object that someone must have patented or generated a copyright for. Why were they allowed to do that. Was the military (star fleet) exempt from this by using the replicator or did the military pay a certain fee based on usage.

    Well, I remember an episode that all homes had those new fangled replicators….so since energy was free and energy was part of what created the replicated product, did they have to pay for that? So in a sense Star Trek was a communist/socialist country that everone got everything for free and everyone worked for the common good.

    So looking at the laws that are being proposed, how will the new laws impact if someone creates a new technology that will allow for the mass production of replicatable products (i.e. insert x ingredience/materials, out comes finished product)…if using it for personal use, you should be able to buy the ingredience and create the item yourself then if said item was a $10k Rolex look alike that did everything the rolex did but didn’t have the name and cost $2 what would prevent you from doing it?

    Anyway, just thinking out loud about restrictive laws that might stiffle inovation because of fears of lawsuits….or is that the reason for these laws, so only certain cartels can do the inovation…

  89. @ cndcitizen : Replicators : exactly what computers are to information.
    This is what I’ve been saying all along. Computers are information replicators. It’s done, finished, WE WON! All these obscene laws, all those obsolete cartels, they want to pretend it didn’t happen, they want to use laws to make it a criminal offense to use the info-replicators WE ALREADY LEGALLY BOUGHT WITH OUR OWN MONEY: OUR COMPUTERS AND THE INTERNET.

    Let’s ignore the $10k Rolex, and talk about a $20 Timex, a daily need. If I need a watch, and I have the choice to buy one for $20, or else make one for $2 in my own replicator, which one will I do given the choice? In a world where other things are still not free, ie. the real world of scarcity, which one SHOULD I do? I say the $2 replicated option is more ethical, because I can free $18 for more necessary purposes. In a world with replicators, it behooves us to use them for all they are worth. Anything else is a waste of our true capability. Until we live in a world where everyone is well taken care of, and we are 100% environmentally sustainable, we can’t afford to waste golden miraculous opportunities like using the info-replicators we have already worked so hard to invent and buy. Moreover, the only way to stop us will be through use of egregious force, such as threat of extreme punishment.

    We have a new puzzle to solve now: how do we still inspire people to work super hard and invent the next Rolex design, so we can all replicate ourselves the best? They won’t get to sell them anymore, not even the design, because there’s no ethical way to force everyone to pay. This is no small question. I think it spells the end of free market economics as we knew it, and we have not been putting much thought into alternative social and economic systems for a long time. I suggest we better get started, and quickly, because the info-replicators are here to stay, and can’t be turned off. All this corrupt push for more strict copyright, and artificial restrictions on what can be replicated (DRM / TPM), are doomed to fail, as they damned well should be.

  90. exploderator says:

    Comments to be reviewed by moderator?
    I just tried to post a comment, and got a message briefly flash that said my comment would be reviewed a moderator. My comment did not show up. That’s new to me, never happened before.

    Did I get in trouble? Was it my sweaty balls post above? Or is this the new norm? Anyone else know anything?

  91. exploderator says:

    re: Comments to be reviewed by moderator?
    Posting with the name=exploderator, I had no review by mod message, the post just came straight up. Then after another reload, I also found my post re replicators. The mods are awake it would seem? And they work by name? Curious and curiouser.

  92. cndcitizen says:

    Yes, I believe they work by name as I have been moderated a couple times after criticizing Harper (with a german conentations). Looking back it looks like some of those posts have been removed also….although they were inflamatory, if you look at the 1930-1939 you can see the same strategies in place, but will not comment further.

    So yes, most likely all posts do not make it on this site and are moderated, but I understand…most sites are now moderated to keep the discussion on point.

  93. Music
    There will always be be music and music creators, file-sharing or not, corporate pawn Harper government or not. No need to worry about that side of things. Let’s just keep promoting music by sharing files as long as we are able. The more of us there are, the less likely the copyright police will find us. I wish folks wouldn’t say that the issue is media transfer. The issue is file sharing. Screw the corporations and their slave “artists”. Let them go bankrupt. Make the world a better place.

  94. copyright
    James Moore is just ignorant as any other mps that can spend your money,but won’t listen to your concerns

  95. Minister Moore on CTV
    Moore was on CTV’s Question Period. He was asked about copyright:

    I wonder if those audits with respect to MP’s expenses should include personal internet records. If we’re about to be tracked online by government with respect to copyright, I think it’s only fair that MP’s personal accounts are subjected to public scrutiny.

  96. Not satisfied with his governments legacy as War Criminals, Mr big politician Moore is going to make criminals out of each and every teenager in Canada.

    “Yes Your Honor”, said the little girl with pigtails, “I did download that song and I’m sorry. But I only played it once then I deleted it, it was shit”

  97. Hindgrinder says:

    @ Jason K
    Possibly the most brilliant comment I’ve seen this year.
    Can we get access to the CCTV cams too? Especially the ones that are watching the people who are watching the public.

    HG – You can’t take my rights without giving me yours first. No Quarter. YAR!

  98. exploderator says:

    Moore on CTV
    Yes, love the way this ******** says he would be glad to let us see his iPod play list. As though it would be a perfectly normal or reasonable request under any circumstances.

    Bottom line: if you want to search me, show up with a warrant, based on DIRECT EVIDENCE / PROBABLE CAUSE THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED. END OF DISCUSSION.

    If these new laws propose to scrap our Charter rights over the nebulous chance that we could have broken copyright laws, these crooks will have a bloody fight on their hands. The fact that he casually talks this way is a very disturbing omen for the abysmal disregard for privacy it seems to indicate.

  99. Nate Knowles says:

    Why did canadians vote in the conservatives? I miss Paul Martin…

  100. People voted in the Conservatives on the promise that they would deal with the “lobbying” issue in Parliament and bring in Government accountability messures in the wake of the Sponsorship scandal the Liberals had a hand in. Interestingly if we end up with a bill that doesn’t reflect the voice of the Canadian people, than Government accountability needs to be tweaked more, and so do our lobby laws.

    On an issue that is being presented through “ethics” and “emotions”, all it would take to put this bill down is 1 case before the Supreme court arguing the economic facts of this situation to send these groups packing. They have very weak cases with respect to fact, something I was hoping government would have realized by now. Those cases that have been to trial in the US, were won on weak defenses, and the economics at play with respect to the digital revolution has yet to make it into any court room around the world. That will change soon I think, especially if we have a bill that doesn’t reflect the new economic realities.

    Considering that most of this legislation would be based on “ethics” and “emotions” rather than facts, it most likely will not be enforceable anyway.

  101. Only hurt consumers
    DRM only hurts consumers. Pirates will pirate that is way it is and will allways be. Nothing will change filesharing adapts must faster then laws do. If the government wants to make everyone a criminal then this is the thing to do. Bill C61 is too heavy handed it will be unenforceable.

  102. @Hindgrinder
    I actually would seriously concider running for your party, if the name was changed to something like the tech party or something. I think that the “pirate” part is a bit of a crutch, considering your platform doesn’t represent piracy at all. I’m also in Van Loans riding, and my family is very well respected in the business community here.

    I recently quit the music industry entirely due to the way this debate is going. I’m 34 now, and I’ll probably be 50 before the economic problems are actually solved in this industry and it’s actually worth getting into again. Many in this industry feel the same way, many are agaist with what the CRIA are calling for, but are not able to speak out due to contracts, and threat of litigation. It’s too bad for this industry and many others including tech, that the real issues are being ingored.

    I personally feel that the word “pirate” to discribe the consumer accessing a new medium and marketplace is highly discriminating, and steers this debate away from the economic problems all industries face with respect to the digital revolution, especially with the term “value” is being redefinied and new business models emerging. But those new business models need way more attention and investment which is being hindered by the “old” guys in this debate.

    My blog is located:

    It’s grabbed some attention from researchers from the UN, along with Nettwerk Music Group. If you consider changing the parties name to something that is more acceptable in the publics eye, I will join and run in the next election and you may end up ousting the Minister of International Affairs with representation in Ottawa. But I will not run under a “pirate” banner. I think that misrepresents the platform in which the party stands for.

  103. maebnoom says:

    @ Jason K
    Very well put & totally agreed. That party name pretty much guarantees they won’t ever be taken seriously by the mainstream, regardless of what their actual platform is.

    (captcha = playoffs wine = how
    did it know what I was doing today?)

  104. This is ridiculous!
    Who do you think will monitor what people download? Internet providers? Don’t think so. Even if they were able to control who’s downloading what, they cannot really tell what material is copyrighted and what material is not.

    Even if they pass such a law, who is going to enforce it? I cannot imagine that the activities of millions of people who download files over the internet will be scrutinized in detail.

  105. Hindgrinder says:

    @ Jason K
    I can understand your criticism of the party name. There has also been valid comments as to how narrow the platform is because at this time it mainly encompasses digital issues like copyright/patent reform, privacy and government transparency. The name is a bit gimmicky and we are under no illusion that the likelihood of getting substantial candidates elected is non-existent. And that’s fine tbh. If an incumbent party came out and adopted the issues we bring to the table I’m quite certain we would swing their way. Keep in mind there is an INCREDIBLE amount of voter apathy in our country – particularly with the youth vote and we aim to give them something to stand for that they can unite behind. Sending letters worked last time but I doubt it will this time. Here’s hoping I’m wrong. Please also keep in mind that we didn’t start this fight – the lobbyists call everyone who downloads anything a thief and a pirate. I am not ashamed. On a Pirate ship – Democracy means life and death – not lobby and bribe. Thanks for the comment though! Feel free to come pay us a visit.

    HG – Port to Port Over TCP/IP Modulated Waves

  106. @Hindgrinder
    It’s much easier to seperate people on political ideology and bank on voter apathy than it is to bring them together around a common goal and put forth real opposition. In reality the Youth vote means nothing. The majority of Canadian voters are boomers, not youth. They out number the youth. There is definately a generation gap within Canadian Politics, which will not be solved through banking on apathy. That’s a set up for political failure. A more accurate response would be to #1 change the party name, and #2 relate to the boomer generation. They went through basically the same thing we are going through right now back in the 60’s, but insead of artists being the cheif bad guys, they actually helped in security the freedom of expression, freedom of choice, freedom of speech.

    Fight and target the boomers more, and find a better name that will sell more to this crowd, and you’ll reach more credibility and probably more seats in the Commons. My thoughts anyway. I will not come to visit, nor support a party that gives the false impression that they are about piracy. That’s not what this is about. Change the name and you may end up with a strong ally in your fight for your platform.

  107. @Hindgrinder
    There is a big difference between a vote with respect to anger of the political system, and apathy. Over 20,000 boomers showed up their support in my riding for Van Loan during a time of the worst political turn out in Canadian history. Support for your party will have to be faught in each individual riding. Having the name “Pirate Party” will be a major uphill battle for your candidates, let alone presenting a credible platorm around that name to the public and business communities.

  108. @Joe L
    “Who do you think will monitor what people download? Internet providers? Don’t think so.”

    Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but if ACTA is adopted, ISPs would be forced to do the monitoring.

  109. if ACTA is adopted, ISPs would be forced to do the monitoring
    No, under a 3 strikes law, the monitoring would still be done by the copyright “owners”. But all they have to do is send a complaint to the ISP and the ISP would be required to forward it to the connection owner of record. 3 complaints and the ISP would be required to shut down the internet connection.

    The techniques used by the “hunters” to locate alleged infringers are somewhat simplistic. They have a potential for error and are easily bypassed, if given an incentive. Up until now there hasn’t been any incentive, the defaults for P2P applications are effectively “wide open”. The situation can (and will) change if such legislation gains traction.

    There is a built in assumption to supporters of any kind of “3 strikes laws” that P2P technology is static. That is false. In fact the technology already exists for other applications (online banking, corporate networks, spam management, dns security, etc) but hasn’t been applied to P2P applications – yet. It can and probably will be.
    The potential for abuse of these laws is large, while their effectiveness will be limited and shortlived.

    The answer to the “enforcement problem” can’t be technology based in any way, that just leads to an escalation whereby everybody suffers, especially the innocent.
    The situation has to be addressed at a society and economic level. That means politics, and preferably politics at an international level. So far the lobbyists seem to have the ear of the politicians, but that will change (or the elected politicians will need to change).

  110. cndcitizen says:

    I am agog
    Who writes the laws….if someone doesn’t understand what is going on in the world tries to write a law…do they even have a basis….I am stuck with the simple comparison that a ditch diger (MP) is writing laws about technology when they have never even seen a laptop…if you asked a lot of MP’s they would say that they are connected but actually it is their assistances that know how to boot up a computer and they have no clue….oh they can get email from their Blackburys though…they never set them up…someone else did. Someonen the knows about tech need to help in these discussions

  111. Junji Hiroma says:

    It seems Harper and his cronies Troll the WHOLE internet (I have Proof)

    Maybe Harper will take the hint,take a hike with his Bill.It’s not going to get approved

  112. Hindgrinder says:

    @Jason K
    Keep on thinking the youth vote means nothing. Baby Boomers barely know how to set up their pop3 email. If they vote in things like ACTA, the next generation will vote them out and burn the “treaty”. I’m not PPCA for the “brand” or “credibility”. More for the “defiance”. I will not disagree that it is a sad state of political affairs that there is even a NEED for a Pirate Party.

    @oldguy – Again bang on. Rogers and Shaw will fight back and refuse 3 strikes I suspect. Not sure aboot Telus and Bell.

    @Junji – Juicy link! Thx! I feel like I should be getting a paycheque now…. I wonder how much they pay for votes?

    HG – I’m Just a Regular Everyday Pirate Guy

  113. maebnoom says:

    “…the defaults for P2P applications are effectively “wide open”. The situation can (and will) change if such legislation gains traction.”


    You’ve got that right. I can assure you that many P2P app devs are already poised to react to any changes. Regardless of whoever ends up doing the monitoring (if that actually happens), rest assured that they can’t keep up with encryption techniques & the like.

  114. “You’ve got that right. I can assure you that many P2P app devs are already poised to react to any changes.”

    Most already support RC4 encryption…which has known issues and isn’t the strongest encryption method. An efficient tool can crack RC4 in minutes. I’m looking forward to clients implementing stronger encryption methods such as “Serpent”, “MARS” or “AES”. These days I do very little that could actually be considered illegal, but it’s the principle of the fact for me. If they’re going to track me, with the pre-assumption of guilt, I’m going to make it as difficult as possible for them.

  115. Hindgrinder says:

    @ IamME
    Your ISP can’t delay traffic for “minutes” to pause and run stand alone decrypt software on every download.
    In Bells case they already have customers jumping ship due to poor speeds and excessive p2p throttle.
    As the Oldguy put is so eloquently – There is not a technological solution to this.
    Real-time DPI is far out of reach even on the simplest of crypt.
    When regular citizen have to defend themselves against ruthless corporations…
    This is called Union.
    When regular citizens have to start deploying counter-measures to protect their privacy from government intrusion….
    This is called Revolution.
    When both of these examples are based on a foreign nations government (USA) and lobby groups (MAFIAA) this is called invasion.
    When foreign nations invade your sovereignty…the typical response is war.

    HG – Note: I am not an election candidate and do not speak for the party. I’m just a supporter.

  116. @Hindgrinder
    I’m not saying that it’s feasible to do it in real time. This will never be a feasible option unless they make encryption illegal. 😛 However, they could potentially capture suspect or high-volume downloader/uploader traffic and alanyse it off-line. In this case, I would rather be using an encryption algorithm that takes years to crack, rather than one that takes minutes.

  117. Hindgrinder says:

    “”If they’re going to track me, with the pre-assumption of guilt, I’m going to make it as difficult as possible for them.””

    I like this and think I have read it before somewhere…either way…i’m ripping it for my own personal use.
    U mind?


  118. @Hindgrinder
    Not at all, go for it. 😀