Earlier today I posted on a new copyright documentary in which I raised the question of whether it was being supported by CRIA, much like the BCBC site. I have just spoken to a producer at the film company, who suggested that was not the case. I have therefore removed the post. The clips in question can be found here.
Canada_Version 3.0 Documentary – A Correction
4 Comments
Recent Posts
Named to Canadian Lawyer’s Top 25 Most Influential Lawyers 
Be Careful What You Wish For: Why Asking Google Maps to Defy the U.S. on Lake Ontario Would Undermine Canadian Digital Sovereignty 
Big Money, Bigger Design Changes: What the Meta Settlement Means for Canada, Bill C-34, and the Age Verification and Privacy Risks That Remain 
Unleashing the Trolls: Ontario Court Opens the Door to Liability for Influencers Who Weaponize Their Audiences 
Why Ottawa Will Likely Join the U.S. in Opposing the Quebec Online Streaming Law at the Centre of the Trade Battle
IMHO You really should have left the posting and just added an update to it.
…
Looking at those clips, I have a feeling that someone, maybe not the CRIA but someone, is shuffling the cards.
Fine up to a point..
So, here I am listening and thinking I agree so far, then come up from the entirely false claim from the CEO of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce that Canada is a laggard on Copyright. Then the claim that “downloading” (Probably legally or illegally) is the cause of changes in recording industry. Then Graham Henderson (no additional comment needed — he’s pretty out-of-touch in every clip).
Oh, and yes — it is a grassroots issue that individual creators are interested in. And that’s why I’m here opposing key parts of C-32! It’s just people like me, trying to make a living, and seeing some of these reforms as the greatest threat.
*sigh* Even the “Fair Use” clip was someone confusing weaker US law with stronger Canadian law.
And Canada already protects copyright holders, more in favour of copyright holders than other countries (Such as the USA).
So, clips seem to be general statements that have nothing to do with C-32 style reforms, or are false statements.
Who are the producers of this? Why the reference to fair use? Why are the only lawyers consulted those who act for the motion picture and music industries? Copyright is not about big business but they are the ones who are perpetuating that view by dominating a discussion that has stifled many creators voices. sigh