First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Canadian copyright.
30 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / Canada eh?
Offline
Posted 6/16/08
The bill won't be passed since it would have to violate peoples privacy and it wouldn't benefit Canada at all since it would cost a huge amount of money to enforce it, then when they suspect you, they would have to get a search warrant to check your computer. They won't spend the money and man power to enforce this unenforceable harmless "crime".
Even if it passes it would not be enforced at all.
1617 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
75 / M / TDOT
Offline
Posted 6/16/08
long
Posted 6/16/08
Too long...
16324 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Bangalore,India
Offline
Posted 6/16/08
lolz poor canadians
they will be poor if they have to pay for everything
17154 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / Canada
Offline
Posted 6/16/08
i don`t feel reading it at all haha
3707 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 6/16/08
They will never be able to enforce it without breaking their own privacy laws.

Anyway, it's kind of ironic how Canada had the most inefficient copyright laws before this legislation was passed
Posted 6/17/08
Leave my JAV collection alone, you pigs !



Sorry that is directed toward the bad guys not any posters.
Posted 6/17/08
Here is an interesting article on some thoughts on why it was passed and what kind of bullying the U.S. was doing to Canada's government. I will highlight the good parts.

How the U.S. got its Canadian copyright bill
http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/443867

Last week's introduction of new copyright legislation ignited a firestorm with thousands of Canadians expressing genuine shock at provisions that opposition MPs argued would create a "police state." As opposition to the copyright bill mounts, the most common question is "why"?

Why, given the obvious public concern with the bill stretching back to last year, did Industry Minister Jim Prentice plow ahead with rules that confirm many of the public's worst fears?

Why did a minority government introduce a bill that appears likely to generate strong opposition from both the Liberals and NDP with limited political gain?

Why did senior ministers refuse to even meet with many creator and consumer groups who have unsurprisingly voiced disappointment with the bill?

While Prentice has responded by citing the need to update Canada's copyright law in order to comply with the World Intellectual Property Organization's Internet treaties, the reality may be that those treaties have little to do with Bill C-61.

Instead, the bill dubbed by critics as the Canadian Digital Millennium Copyright Act (after the U.S. version of the law) is the result of an intense public and private campaign waged by the U.S. government to pressure Canada into following its much-criticized digital copyright model.

The U.S. pressure has intensified in recent years, particularly since there is a growing international trend toward greater copyright flexibility with countries such as Japan, New Zealand and Israel either implementing or considering more flexible copyright standards.

The public campaign was obvious. U.S. ambassador to Canada David Wilkins was outspoken on the copyright issue, characterizing Canadian copyright law as the weakest in the G7 (despite the World Economic Forum ranking it ahead of the U.S.).

The U.S. Trade Representatives Office (USTR) made Canada a fixture on its Special 301 Watch list, an annual compilation of countries the U.S. believes have sub-standard intellectual property laws. The full list contains nearly 50 countries accounting for 4.4 billion people or approximately 70 per cent of the world's population.

Most prominently, last year U.S. senators Dianne Feinstein and John Cornyn, along with California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, escalated the rhetoric on Canadian movie piracy, leading to legislative reform that took just three weeks to complete.

The private campaign was even more important. Sources say that U.S. officials, emboldened by the successful campaign for anti-camcording legislation, upped the ante at the Security and Prosperity Partnership meeting in Quebec last summer. Canadian officials arrived ready to talk about a series of economic concerns but were quickly rebuffed by their U.S. counterparts, who indicated that progress on other issues would depend upon action on the copyright file.

Those demands were echoed earlier by the USTR, which, according to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, made veiled threats about "thickening the border" between Canada and the U.S. if Canada refused to put copyright reform on the legislative agenda.

Faced with unrelenting U.S. pressure, the newly installed industry minister was presented with a mandate letter requiring a copyright bill that would meet U.S. approval. The government promised copyright reform in the October 2007 Speech from the Throne and was set to follow through last December, only to pull back at the last hour in the face of mounting public concern (Disclosure: I created the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group that has more than 48,000 members and played a role in this public opposition).

In the months that followed, Prentice's next attempt to bring the copyright bill forward was stalled by internal cabinet concerns over how the bill would play out in public. The bill was then repackaged to include the new consumer-focused provisions such as the legalization of recording television shows and the new peer-to-peer download $500 damage award.

The heart of the bill, however, remained largely unchanged since satisfying U.S. pressure remained priority number one. Just after 11:00 a.m. last Thursday, the U.S. got its Canadian copyright bill.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.