While they were busy sending the internet providers a messages earlier this week, the Federal Government is now set to introduce tougher copyright law, designed to crackdown on piracy…
It’s pretty well the same bill that the Conservatives tried to introduce before the 2011 election
So you go down to WalMart and buy a DVD, copy it to your computer, and you are guilty of a crime and face a fine of $5000 and a criminal record. Great!
Good to see the Conservatives allowed the Americans to write this bill for us.
We’re lucky there aren’t many video stores left in Northwest BC, because otherwise Nathan Cullen would be supporting this bill as well.
Next step: outlaw libraries.
Ah no one reads anymore anyways… it’s too much work.
On a different idea and back to the original theme, I don’t quite understand why you can’t move your DVD that you purchased to your personal device, i.e.: iPad (or discounted Blackberry tablet, get them fast they seem to be going out of business
business.financialpost.com/2011/ … -playbook/
)
Seems to me that’s what the new era of technology is designed for.
If you download a movie from iTunes for instance, are you “breaking the law” by transferring it to your IPad or iPod?
That’s really the only part of the new copyright law I have a problem with, the idea that you can’t move your material for personal use, I’m still not clear if that’s part of this new copyright law or not.
Seems if you can copy your CD’s to MP3 player, then you should be able to copy your personal DVD movies to your computer or personal device.
As for the rest of the bill, I have no problems with providing protection for content providers, if everyone was to “swap” their music and movies and such I’m not sure there would be much of an industry in the future.
But if you’ve purchased the item from a legitimate vendor you should be able to use it on whatever platform you wish, guess that might be a hard thing to safeguard though.
[quote=“DarcyMcGee”]
As for the rest of the bill, I have no problems with providing protection for content providers, if everyone was to “swap” their music and movies and such I’m not sure there would be much of an industry in the future.[/quote]
Did you ever trade mixed tapes, or CD’s with your friends in highschool? Are you willing to be knocked with a five thousand dollar fine for that too?
[quote=“bubbasteve735”]
[quote=“DarcyMcGee”]
As for the rest of the bill, I have no problems with providing protection for content providers, if everyone was to “swap” their music and movies and such I’m not sure there would be much of an industry in the future.[/quote]
Did you ever trade mixed tapes, or CD’s with your friends in highschool? Are you willing to be knocked with a five thousand dollar fine for that too?[/quote]
Why is it whenever I read one of your posts I have the image of someone yelling out of their parent’s basement window? Anyways, not exactly sure what you are trying to ask me, other than if I want to pay five thousand dollars to share music with my friends, so the answer would be No to that.
But then, I imagine a creative person would find some way to share their favourite tunes, maybe just lend them the CD?
At any rate, my understanding of the copyright legislation is that once it is in place a number of music services currently unavailable to Canadians will be on the horizon, so you could soon be able to recommend songs to the wide circle of friends that you have that have you so fearful of such a financial burden.
It’s the criminal aspect that I don’t agree with.
When you taped a song off the radio in the 80s, sure, you were committing a copyright violation. But you weren’t going to get a criminal record and a $5000 fine for it. But that’s essentially what the American music industry wants the Canadian government to do – give kids permanent criminal records for taping songs off the radio. You’ll note that nobody in the Canadian recording industry wants this kind of thing.
In fact, the Canadian equivalent of the RIAA broke apart over this very issue. The Canadian and independent labels left the organization, which now consists of only American record companies.
The irony is that the Conservatives recently cut off funding for important environmental work in BC, citing American lobbyist influence as the reason. Yet they turn around and introduce a bill that was, as the Wikileaks cables have pointed out, quite literally written by American industry lobbyists.
Nobody has a problem with protecting copyrights. But let’s not criminalize normal behaviour just because Americans asked us to do so, to protect industries that are increasingly irrelevant.
[quote=“DarcyMcGee”]
[quote=“bubbasteve735”]
Did you ever trade mixed tapes, or CD’s with your friends in highschool? Are you willing to be knocked with a five thousand dollar fine for that too?
Why is it whenever I read one of your posts I have the image of someone yelling out of their parent’s basement window? Anyways, not exactly sure what you are trying to ask me, other than if I want to pay five thousand dollars to share music with my friends, so the answer would be No to that.
But then, I imagine a creative person would find some way to share their favourite tunes, maybe just lend them the CD?
At any rate, my understanding of the copyright legislation is that once it is in place a number of music services currently unavailable to Canadians will be on the horizon, so you could soon be able to recommend songs to the wide circle of friends that you have that have you so fearful of such a financial burden.[/quote]
Swapping music, is swapping music, that’s all. Whether it be P2P, or on a mixed tape, or CD. They had issues at the time of recordable tapes, they even put taxes on them, so people would be discouraged from sharing. One way or another, people are going to find ways to swap music, and videos, free of charge. Regardless of legislation against it. Artists should be happy their music is being listened to. It’s the companies that produce the films and music, that take issue with it most of the time. They stand to lose the most from file sharing. Not the artists themselves. Just think of how many billions of dollars film companies make, with product placements in movies. Ever noticed how many brand name things you see in shots in the new release movies? They never used to do that. Why should they care if the movie is pirated? They get paid to place a coca cola can in the shot, or to pan around to the panasonic phone or TV, or to use Ford cars in the movie and show the blue oval instead of blacking it out. They only care because they’re greedy…
And be guilty of a criminal act?
I was talking about e-books with the Librarian here. She informed me that the industry decided books circulate SIX times through a library so they’re going for licenses to make libraries pay for e-books that only six people can download, then they must buy more.
What’s next? Paperbacks that ignite when you get to the last page. Just so you can’t give them away.
Sadly…this does not upset me. Steven Harper asked for a majority and Canada gave it to him. He can do what the hell he wants for the next four years.
This could be a bumpy flight (buckle up).
[quote=“hitest”]Sadly…this does not upset me. Steven Harper asked for a majority and Canada gave it to him. He can do what the hell he wants for the next four years.
This could be a bumpy flight (buckle up).[/quote]
It upsets me a bit, I didn’t vote for him. YAY one step closer to being america. Greedy pigs…
[quote=“bubbasteve735”]
[quote=“hitest”]Sadly…this does not upset me. Steven Harper asked for a majority and Canada gave it to him. He can do what the hell he wants for the next four years.
This could be a bumpy flight (buckle up).[/quote]
**It upsets me a bit, I didn’t vote for him. **YAY one step closer to being america. Greedy pigs…[/quote]
I did not vote for him either. But, the majority of Canada did so we need to live with the aftermath and ride it out. This is how democracy works (I accept the outcome).
I am hopeful that things will get better after Canadians understand the consequences of a tory mandate. The pendulum will swing back again.
copyright law before internet was simple but hard to catch someone, your old cd’s, casette tape, books, magazines could be given to others to read but you were breaking the law but you wouldn’t be caught but since it is easier to trace via internet easier to prosecute, doesn’t mean the law is right just easier to catch ppl now
Can I have some clarification here.
Am I guilty of a crime if I copy CDs to this laptop so I can listen to them when I take my computer with me on holiday.
Am I guilty of a crime if I recopy them to my IPod so I can listen to them when i go running.
Is all recopying illegal even if I am only copying to my other personal devices.
And if it is OK for me to recopy is it OK for me to sell my CD (for a nickel) to a friend so they can now recopy it to their devices?
I get the idea that massive online sharing through internet sites or pirate radio or what have you is a problem that should be dealt with.
I do have a problem with being told what we can or can’t do with personal possessions that we might share with our small circle of family and friends. What’s next. I can’t lend a shirt to a buddy because he should be buying his own.
Once again, I need clarification.
No, it’s not currently illegal to give (or sell) your old CDs, DVDs, or books to someone. Those industries just want to make it so.
You can burn as many personal copies as you want as long as you pay $250,000 and six months in jail for every single copy.
If you tap a Hotspot look out for the Predator drone circling above collecting MAC addresses to run through the giant consumer database.
If you crack any built in copy-protection to do so, there’s a water board waiting for you at Gitmo. Terr-ur-rist!
You’ll also violate new Terms of Service with Netflix and Hulu if you allow anyone not of your immediate family to watch. Extra $2 for each 2nd cousin or girlfriend in the room at the time. TOS now excludes partners not married in an approved church as family.
As of Apr.1, 2015 it will be illegal to photograph, quote, or sell the autograph of a celebrity.
In related news, Elmo Sneed has Trademarked the words “Chinese and American Food” and “Chinese and Canadian Food” for a proposed restaurant franchise and will be touring North America suing every cafe displaying those words on any signage or advertisements.
The deal is, we don’t own our music, even if we pay for it, we’re only paying for the rights to listen to it. That’s it. It’s just a cash grab from the big record companies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Reznor
The only people who make money, off of record sales, or Itunes, or wherever you purchase your music, is the record labels. That’s it. Barely any of the money from record sales goes to the artist themself. Artists make their money going on tours. They have always been that way. You’re not hurting the artists or the actors and actresses at all, when you download music or a movie. This is just another way of US style “big brother”. Frankly it disgusts me.
[quote=“bubbasteve735”]The deal is, we don’t own our music, even if we pay for it, we’re only paying for the rights to listen to it. That’s it. It’s just a cash grab from the big record companies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Reznor
The only people who make money, off of record sales, or Itunes, or wherever you purchase your music, is the record labels. That’s it. Barely any of the money from record sales goes to the artist themself. Artists make their money going on tours. They have always been that way. You’re not hurting the artists or the actors and actresses at all, when you download music or a movie. This is just another way of US style “big brother”. Frankly it disgusts me.[/quote]
Well a quick little search on google finds not all artists share your world view on the issue.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8266287.stm
Research others if you so desire, seems more than a few suggest that the issue is “hurting” artists, probably actors too
All kidding aside, the new law will make it a crime to break any digital lock code, even to make yourself a backup copy.