Canada to get tough on digital piracy
Legislation introduced in Canadian Parliament on Thursday would fine consumers about $500 in Canadian dollars for owning bootleg copies of digital music and up to $20,000 for posting copyrighted music to the Internet or giving away an iPod with music on it.
The changes are designed to bring the country's Copyright Act into the digital age. As it is today, the law does not allow people to copy music onto devices such as MP3 players or computers, according to TheStar.com.
Under the new law, consumers could copy a book, newspaper, or photograph that was legally acquired but couldn't give away the copies or copy material that was borrowed.
Consumers could copy music that was legally acquired but would be prohibited from copying music that was borrowed or rented. It also would be illegal to post copyrighted work on the Internet without the permission of the owner and to circumvent digital locks designed to prevent illegal distribution.
The bill, introduced by Industry Minister Jim Prentice, would allow consumers to record TV and radio programs for playing back later, but it would prohibit them from keeping the copies indefinitely, according to Reuters.
Elinor Mills covers Internet security and privacy. She joined CNET News in 2005 after working as a foreign correspondent for Reuters in Portugal and writing for The Industry Standard, the IDG News Service, and the Associated Press. E-mail Elinor. 
Not if the content was protected by a digital lock (DRM). Circumvention technology would be banned. Cell phone unlocking, watching foreign DVDs, copying music from a protected CD you own to your cell phone, watching a DVD on Linux - all subject to a penalty of up to $20,000. This government has disregarded the letters from thousands of Canadian consumers, artists, and citizens, and instead written a law in cahoots with Hollywood and the RIAA.
>> "Legislation introduced in Canadian Parliament on Thursday would fine consumers about $500 in Canadian dollars for owning bootleg copies of digital music".
...So, Canadian citizens will be fined $500.00 for possessing a $0.99, so-called, "bootleg" song..?
>> "...up to $20,000 for posting copyrighted music to the Internet".
...And, Canadians can look forward to being fined $20,000.00 for "making available" (apparently without actually, necessarily, even being shown to distribute even a single copy)..?
>> "...or giving away an iPod with music on it".
...Excuse me, but that pretty much explicitly says that consumers DO NOT own the individual-copy of any "intellectual property" that they have legitimately paid-for (despite the laws which are supposed to protect that very right).
>> "...circumvent digital locks designed to prevent illegal distribution"
...Also, Canadians can be arrested for exercising their legal-rights (as consumers) simply by bypassing DRM (even if that DRM directly violates their legally-established rights)..?
And, finally
>>"...The bill, introduced by Industry Minister Jim Prentice, would allow consumers to record TV and radio programs for playing back later, but it would prohibit them from keeping the copies indefinitely"
...which is so impossibly-vague that it pretty much makes using a VCR, so legally-dangerous, that only a fool would claim that this "law" doesnt virtually OUTLAW the practice (for ALL, REAL, intents, and purposes).
This proposal does not bring the Canadian "...Copyright Act into the digital age". It drags consumer rights back to the dark-ages, of "nobility" (who permanently own everything), and "serfs" (who can never own anything). In short... this entire charade is a LIE.
Good Canada... now roll-over, and play dead, like a good little doggy!
>>The bill, introduced by Industry Minister Jim Prentice, would allow consumers to record TV and radio programs for playing back later, but it would prohibit them from keeping the copies indefinitely, according to Reuters.
So just how do you define indefinitely? In order to find someone in violation you would have to allow indefinitely + x time to pass and since you would be waiting forever for that to happen, the law can not be enforced literally. So it must mean to be when the "VCR" policeman arbitrarily decides that someone's precious recording is too old and must be destroyed.
Microg
- by Linuxaurus August 8, 2008 4:11 AM PDT
- Ouch! $500 for each song, that could mean some folks with huge mp3 collections shelling out 6 figures to pay fines! Best to only deal with legal downloads rather than dabble with torrents and illegal file sharing networks that could leave you bankrupt if you get caught by Jim Prentice and his associates.
- Reply to this comment
-
(9 Comments)