Discover Top Posts Tagged with #bill c-32

Did I just tweet bitchy questions at three different MPs including the Prime Minister and Minister for Justice?

Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe it’s Maybelline.

#it's about bill C-32 #which hasn't moved literally in a year #and which the Libs took victory laps for introducing at the time #and then patted themselves on the backs during Pride Month for #and I'm like....#y'know.....#maybe y'all should actually try PASSING C-32 #before you take to praising yourselves for it #just sayin'#Canadian Politics #Bill C-32

Victim's Voices to be Heard in Canadian Courts

Cretins, crooks, and convicts beware… the days of focusing on your hurts, habits and hang-ups will soon be superseded by a new Bill of Rights for victims, courtesy of Bill C-32, the Conservative government’s fulfillment of its election promise to recognize the forgotten victims of your crimes.

With the passing of this new law, victims will be empowered to ask questions and get answers about their…

View On WordPress

#aboriginal women #Assembly of First Nations #Bill C-32 #Canadian Victims Bill of Rights #Clayton Ruby #Graham James #John Howard Society #Manitoba Court of Appeal #Stephen Harper #Willie Pickton

Vic Toews - You Were Warned: Identity of Vic Toews' Mistress, Stacey Meek, Revealed (by OperationVicTory)

#Canada #Anonymous #Politics #Vic Toews #Bill C-32 #Bill C-11

Hey, Canadian Tumblr users!

THIS IS OUR SOPA:

Meet Bill C-11, The Canadian Government's answer to SOPA. "We like our politics dry up here."

Under C-11 internet service providers will be responsible for blocking out copyright infringing websites, such as The Pirate Bay. You will no longer be able to access them via their domain name.

Your ISP will also be forced to terminate your internet access completely if you have been accused of internet piracy (no evidence or trial date is required).

Use a PVR to record the new episode of Parks & Rec? PVR's will not be allowed under Bill C-11.

You will also no longer be able to rip CD's to put onto your iPod.

User-generated content websites like Youtube and cloud-based websites can be said to enable or induce infringement, and so could be found liable for millions of dollars.

There is also a lot of questioning as to whether or not this Bill is even necessary, considering the present suing of Canadian torrent search engine IsoHunt (much like the US takedown of MegaUpload).

So take 2 minutes of your time to write a letter to Ottawa expressing your concern over Bill C-11.

#Bill C-11 #SOPA #Canada #ACTA #Bill C-32 #Open Internet

I’m a Canadian.

We’re a quiet bunch; prone to enjoying hockey, drinking stronger beer than our friends south of the border, and lovers of fries smothered in cheese curds and gravy.

We also, apparently, have an inferiority complex when it comes to being evil dirt bags, because we’ve decided to pass our very own version of SOPA up here.

Only better*

Meet Bill-C11. Formerly Bill C-32. (I think they thought if they made the number lower people would care less about it?)

Or as we call it up here; Her Royal Majesty V, Zzzzzzz

We like our politics dry up here.

But, as innocuous as it sounds, C-11 does a whole lot that SOPA did with a few extra twists you might not find in the Wikipedia write-up.

Like your PVR? You can’t keep it under C-11.

Like ripping CDs to your iPod? Say bye-bye.

Hey, do you want to be able to unlock your $500 smartphone and take it to a provider less dedicated to violating your wallet? That won’t be allowed either.

Did you get accused of internet piracy but no evidence has been presented and a trial date hasn’t even been set? Under C-11 your ISP will now be forced to terminate your internet access.

And people say that governments can’t be bought.

We’re not going to get Google or Wikipedia to go dark up here. We don’t have as robust a tech industry to act as a public counterbalance to entertainment industry interests. We have a Prime Minister (that’s French for Dear Leader under the current regime) who doesn’t give a suckling goat what the people think about his policies.

But we do have a lot more recourse in our political system to make politicians pay than our Yankee brethren do. (Yes I know I just insulted everyone south of the Mason Dixon line. I’m sorry. You trying caring about foreign geographical terminology when every person you’ve ever met from a particular country still thinks it’s the height of hilarity to ask if you live in an igloo.) We have things like votes of no confidence that can really bugger up a sitting House member’s day.

So, if you’re Canadian, or you’re friends with a Canadian, or you just really like bacon, click the link at the bottom of this article and share it with as many people as you can.

We can’t afford to lose on this one, Canada.

Besides…

Winners Go Home And Fuck The Prom Queen

-Sean Connery

And he would know.

*And by better, I mean shockingly, horrifyingly worse.

http://www.ccer.ca/canadian-copyright-reform/canadian-copyright-reform-back-with-vengeance/

There are only 14 days left people. Get active.

Updated 10:10 PM Mountain Time

For those who are complaining that C-11 as written isn’t SOPA-like enough to warrant this comparison, please read http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6257/125/ before commenting. Things have changed drastically with respect to this bill in the last week; the really ugly stuff (which has been publicly discussed by members of the C-11 committee.) is in the unpublished modifications in the wake of SOPA’s defeat stateside.

More here, here and here.

#canada #sopa #copyright #bill c-11 #bill c-32 #piracy #GET ON THIS CANADA

Canada's pending and long-overdue new copyright legislation has some flaws that legislators must address, lawyers says.

The Canadian Bar Association has even submitted a formal opposition to several of the sections in Bill C-32 on behalf of its 37,000-strong membership of lawyers, law professors and law students. The CBA points out that many of the flaws in the proposed legislation will impact consumers.

Bill C-32, the Copyright Modernization Act, is the federal government's third attempt to amend Canada's out-dated copyright legislation. The bill aims to put Canada in compliance with the World Intellectual Property Organization's Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the World Performance and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). Canada signed the treaties in 1997, but has yet to ratify them...

#Canadian Bar Association #Bill C-32 #Copyright Modernization Act #Copyright Act #Copyright

Digital Locks, If your MP doesn't get it they can screw us all.

Do you have itunes, or purchase movies, music or tv shows from some sort of online service? If you answered yes, then you should write your MP and get them go change the digital locks provision in Bill C-32. The conserivate party with one noteable exception in the Industry Minister Tony Clement who seems to be very technically savvy, and has fought for alot of the fairuse provisions in bill C-32. However due to his position as industry minister or other reasons, has been very silent about changing C-32 to include a fairuse provision for breaking digital locks. As Bill C-32 is currently written, all fairuse excemptions are over ruled by the digital locks provision. (see my previous blog post).

The conservative Member Ed Fast seems more interested in play politics and with our future in regards to "fair use" or "fair dealing" then doing what is best in the interest of all Canadians.

Mr. Fast asked the question how could justify "eliminating digital locks altogether by allowing circumvention for fair dealing purposes?" to the Canadian Federation of Students and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. Both times his response to their answers was "my concern is if you go that extra step and allow circumvention for fair dealing, you've now made it so much more easy to actually allow the cheaters to undermine the system, where digital locks become absolutely meaningless."

He obviously misses the point. Copyright was designed to stop people from making MONEY from other people's work. For example it was designed to stop people from starting selling CD's and DVD's from out of your basement, to people for 5 dollars where Walmart is selling them for 10 dollars; or buying a projector and selling seat tickets to people who go view a movie. A 21st Century example would be to stop someone from ripping a DVD and selling a digital copy of that movie for money.

If you try and stop fair use you will only encourage piracy. Look at what happened in the United States with the DMCA, it has been changed to allow for the ripping and copying of DVD's for personal use and backup.

What's going on and why should I care?

Mr. Fast seems to be having a hard time seeing the light as to why the digital lock circumvention is essential to Canada's new copyright bill. We want artists to be paid fairly, we don't want to be charged $24.99 for each copy of a movie we want to put on our personal devices. Let me see, to put it in money terms, a copy on your computer, copy on your ipod, perhaps your phone, and don't forget a backup copy, that's $24.99 X 4 formats = $99.96 plus tax for 1 movie in 4 different formats. That is ridiculous. Don't even get me started about what happens if you have an itunes account and a 3rd party or non Apple video player. Guess what under C-32 in it's current form it would be illegal for you to circumvent the digital lock on that purchased DVD and rip it to your computer to put on your ipod, android or windows device. That in my opinion is wrong and as someone who has an entertainment server where I put a digital copy of my purchased DVD's and CD's along with the digital copies I've purchased from itunes, and other online stores, to make it easily accessible for my wife and I to watch our shows listen to our music and play our games. I don't know about you but I don't want to be thrown in jail for ripping a DVD.

What can you do.

Email this Ed Fast, the members of the copyright committee and your MP. Tell them why Bill 32 needs a by pass for consumers to circumvent the digital lock for fair dealing purposes.

Trevor Tye

PS. Please feel free to start your letter or email by copy and pasting the following text.

Feb. 16, 2011 First Name, Last Name Address City, Province Postal Code email

Dear Mr. Ed Fast MP and the copyright committee,

I as a consumer have an answer to your question "Why does Bill 32 needs a by pass for consumers to circumvent the digital lock for fair dealing purposes?"

{Now put what you do with movies, and music. Also put what you would like to do with all that in the future. Also think about how much money you have invested in the movies and music you purchased and how much you would have to spend if you had to re-purchase everything. Don't you think your entitled to a backup?}

Sincerely,

Your Name

Posted via email from The OptionKey Blog | Comment »

#Bill C-32 #canada #copyright #copyright law #Copyright Modernization Act #Digital Locks

Universities, Student Reps Share Thoughts on Copyright

CFS, AUCC submit recommendations to Parliament on Bill C-32

"The Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) and the Association of Universities and Colleges Canada (AUCC) both submitted comprehensive papers to Parliament this week outlining their position on copyright modernization. In their papers both organizations, for the most part, parallel each other in their recommendations for Bill C-32.

In their submissions to the Legislative Committee on Bill C-32, the CFS and AUCC each push for education to be included in the list of categories covered under fair dealing, the reduction of statutory damages for non-commercial copyright infringement, and lifting the ban on breaking digital locks, among other points.

The two organizations also recommend that the requirement to destroy records of online lessons be removed, so that their content can be reused for future courses.

“The course development costs associated with online learning are substantial. Requiring that lessons be redeveloped over and over again would waste educational resources and discourage the use of online learning in Canada,” said the AUCC in their submission.

CFS echoes this point in their paper, stating that the requirement “is an unnecessary and particularly onerous clause.”

“Throughout the course of a degree or diploma program students take a series of courses, all of which build off one another. Preventing a student from keeping the materials they used in classes prior will severely hinder learning for these students while in their studies,” the paper reads.

AUCC advised that “education” should be linked to an “education institution” under the fair dealing categories list, to address the concern that the term education is “too vague”, and could lead to unfair or excessive copying.

CFS, by contrast, supports the broad manner of the term “education”. Their paper also recommends adding the words “such as” to the beginning of the list of categories covered under fair dealing, in order to adopt a more “flexible” definition of the provision.

“This approach represents the most clear and simple means of ensuring that users have reasonable access to copyrighted works, and that creators are compensated for the use of their work. In addition, such an approach would ensure that the law continues to be relevant regardless of changes in technology,” reads the report."

#CFS #AUCC #Bill C-32 #Canadian Federation of Students #Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada #Copyright