Text: Small Text  Normal Text  Large Text  Larger Text
  • Blog
  • The Canadian DMCA: Check the Fine Print

Must Act

Posts On Hot Issues

Blog Archive

PrevPrevJune 2008NextNext
SMTWTFS
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930

The Canadian DMCA: Check the Fine Print

PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Thursday June 12, 2008

As expected, the Canadian DMCA is big, complicated, and a close model of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (Industry Canada provides a large number of fact sheets here).  I'll have much more to say once I've had a careful read, but these are my five key points to take away:

1.   As expected, Prentice has provided a series of attention-grabbing provisions to consumers including time shifting, private copying of music (transferring a song to your iPod), and format shifting (changing format from analog to digital).  These are good provisions that did not exist in the delayed December bill.  However, check the fine print since the rules are subject to a host of strict limitations and, more importantly, undermined by the digital lock provisions.  The effect of the digital lock provisions is to render these rights virtually meaningless in the digital environment because anything that is locked down (ie. copy-controlled CD, no-copy mandate on a digital television broadcast) cannot be copied. As for every day activities like transferring a DVD to your iPod - those are infringing too. Indeed, the law makes it an infringement to circumvent the locks for these purposes.

2.   The digital lock provisions are worse than the DMCA.  Yes - worse.  The law creates a blanket prohibition on circumvention with very limited exceptions and creates a ban against distributing the tools that can be used to circumvent.  While Prentice could have adopted a more balanced approach (as New Zealand and Canada's Bill C-60 did), the effect of these provisions will be to make Canadians infringers for a host of activities that are common today including watching out-of-region-coded DVDs, copying and pasting materials from a DRM'd book, or even unlocking a cellphone. 

While that is the similar to the U.S. law, the exceptions are worse.  The Canadian law includes a few limited exceptions for privacy, encryption research, interoperable computer programs, people with sight disabilities, and security, yet Canadians can't actually use these exceptions since the tools needed to pick the digital lock in order to protect their privacy are banned.  In other words, check the fine print again - you can protect your privacy but the tools to do so are now illegal.  Dig deeper and it gets worse.  Under the U.S. law, there is mandatory review process every three years to identify new exceptions.  Under the Canadian law, its up to the government to introduce new exceptions if it thinks it is needed. Overall, these anti-circumvention provisions go far beyond what is needed to comply with the WIPO Internet treaties and represents an astonishing abdication of the principles of copyright balance that have guided Canadian policy for many years. 

3.   The other headline grabber is the $500 fine for private use infringement.  This will be heralded as a reasonable compromise, but check the fine print.  Canadian law already allows a court to order damages below $500 per infringement, so the change may not be as dramatic as expected (though $500 in damages is the maximum for private use infringement).  Moreover, it is already arguably legal to download sound recordings in Canada.  Under the proposal, there are exceptions for uploading or posting music online (ie. making available) and even the suggestion that posting a copyright-protected work to YouTube could result in the larger $20,000 per infringement damage award.

4.   The ISP provisions are precisely as expected with a statutory notice-and-notice system.  However, check the fine print.  The role of the ISP may be undermined by the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which the government trumpets in its press release.

5.   The education community received several provisions that are largely gutted by the fine print.  For example, library materials can be distributed in electronic form, but must not extend beyond five days.  In other words, it turns librarians into locksmiths.  Moreover, there is an Internet exception that educators wanted but it does not apply for any works that are either password protected or include a notification that they cannot be used.  In other words, online materials that are available under a Creative Commons license are fair game (as they are already), but most everything else is still potentially subject to a restriction.  This was precisely what many feared - rather than pursuing the far superior expansion of fair dealing, the education community got a provision that does little to enhance classroom learning.

I'll have more to say soon, but the takeaway is that the DMCA provisions are worse than the U.S. and the consumer exceptions riddled with limitations as the government promotes a strategy of locking down content and launching lawsuits against Internet users.


Tags:
, , , , , , ,
Share: Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUponEmailPrintPDF

Comments
dead mike

Written by on 2008-06-12 08:58:30
1st post ftw lolol 
 
i like this site just found it today, respekt
Written by Dave on 2008-06-12 12:55:32
So basically the we have no more fair rights if anything is encrypted or locked. Awesome we're fucked.
When

Written by Bob on 2008-06-12 13:00:24
Tabled today..when does it take effect - in other words - when do I shut down Dl'ing TV shows etc. so as not to get nailed by the Rights Police? How does the RCMP feel about going after these $500 thieves?
purpose?

Written by Kevin on 2008-06-12 13:00:32
so did the conservatives bring this forward with the intention of letting it die on the table? 
 
or do they actually intend on pushing this through with a minority government?
TORIES ARE DEAD

Written by heh on 2008-06-12 13:04:40
i read the notice section 
your fine goes form 500$ after one notice to 5000 then to 10000  
so per each tune you will get if you cant afford to pay as most under 25 year olds cant--2.7 years in jail or federal time, with the likes of murderers and people with serious crimes. 
 
thats per infringement , and it might run concurrent and consecutive, so for arguments sake lets think consecutive 
an average music cd is what 15 songs. 
thats a maximum sentence of 40.5 years if you cant pay the fine and thus get life in prison for a music cd , as i said enjoy the jail time for listening to the bare naked ladies cd. 
 
tomorrow harris decima(tion) should do a poll 
and show the liberals exactly what is going to happen if they defeat this. 
DOWN WITH NEO CON TORY's 
 
 
Canadian DMCA Timing

Written by Mediaguy on 2008-06-12 13:05:22
At the moment, my only comment is about the timing of this. Call me overly cynical, but I suspect that Mr. Prentice strategically delayed the the copyright bill announcement so it would take place immediately after the government’s headline-grabbing residential school apology, so as to ensure the mass media’s follow up reporting and commentary would get pushed off the front pages and (hopefully) be relegated to a lower priority in the news than it might otherwise have had.
Principles?

Written by Stephen on 2008-06-12 13:07:02
If it wasn't obvious already, this government is totally unprincipled, not even abiding by conservative principles -- this is a brutal government intervention on the economy. This is so obviously a back-scratching arrangement between Harper and a handful of industry suits. 
 
Written by Zeemman on 2008-06-12 13:07:51
To quote the Doors before I can't anymore.. 
"This is the end 
Beautiful friend 
This is the end 
My only friend, the end 
 
Of our elaborate plans, the end 
Of everything that stands, the end 
No safety or surprise, the end" 
 
OF THE TORIES 
Written by Tyler on 2008-06-12 13:08:29
Woo sounds like fun. Just be cause it's deemed illegal doesn't mean people won't still keep doing it! Digital Piracy has been around for many years and way before the internet was around. If encryptions are changed people find a way around it. It's just that Canada has been somewhat lax with their Piracy laws which most people I find when I talk to.. didn't know about them. It seems people assume we have US Laws ;) Oh well. 
 
It will be interesting to see if the Bill passes. Won't this kill sales for services like iTunes Store, or that other Canadian online Music seller?
And the big joke is no law will make a r

Written by WhoDoesNo2WorkFor on 2008-06-12 13:08:43
And so in yet another country the piracy is pushed further underground and goes by business as usual, and hardworking, honest people who don't know any better get punished. Just like in the US. Practically speaking, the DMCA hasn't stopped piracy growth in the US at all. DRM can still be cracked in countries without such DRM laws. Hell, coders and crackers in the US can go 'underground' using strong RSA2 encryption and work on the projects. In fact, they already do. 
 
So all this money and time wasted on a bill that will do.... nothing, practically speaking. I wish I lived in Ottawa today so I could personally go up to our Minister of finance and kick him in the ****s for being an ignorant fool. 
 
Who does the government work for anyway? It doesn't seem to be working for it's voters. They need to all go back to school and study the concept and philosophy of 'democracy'.
Satire?

Written by Joe on 2008-06-12 13:09:09
The section stating it will be illegal to "distort or mutilate a copyright performance" disturbs me greatly. Particularly if it impaces satire and parody.
If this passes...

Written by Adam on 2008-06-12 13:12:06
Just try to charge me $20,000 for unlocking my iPhone... 
Or, try to charge me for recording a TV show. I pay for the service. But I guess then companies like Bell and Rogers couldn't screw me EVEN MORE and make me pay for time shifting. 
 
This type of copyright reform serves to do NOTHING but shore up collapsing business models. 
A Government who pulls stunts like this has nothing but contempt for its citizens. 
Written by on 2008-06-12 13:14:42
Sorry, but the so-called analysis is yet another example of how biased and misleading the blog has become. The $500 is the max for all related infringements so MUCH less than now.
Disabling autorun a criminal act

Written by Cyborg on 2008-06-12 13:15:01
This bill basically makes disabling auutorun on a CD-ROM a criminal act, since it can be used to bypass copy protection on audio cd. 
 
Also format-shifting of any DVD (to play on an ipod by example) is now illegal, since it requires breaking the CSS. And forget the 500 $ limit on personal use suit, because since you used an illegal tool to do it you are liable up to 20 000 $. 
 
This bill makes basically anyone under the age of 35 a criminal. 
 
- File sharing 1 file can make you liable for up to 20 000 $. Expect RIAA-tactics lawsuits very soon, as the damages claims will climb even higher then in the US. 
 
- As a security analyst, the restrictions almost put me out of a job, since most of the tools that I use will now be illegal to possess... 
 
 
This is even worst then I could ever expect.
asdas

Written by asdasd on 2008-06-12 13:15:14
t his which I will say is only a representation of the truth that is within children, and somewhere within us all. and the truth is beyond these words, and the falsified meaning they have in the world 
don't take this as being taught, everybody is taught wrong, that's the definition of being taught 
this text belongs to no one person, but to us all 
I think of children as from conception, the true good, the true humanity. when we are conceived, we have light, that shines so bright, it can only diminish. children hold within all the truth, good, love and beauty in this world, before it is taken away. children need to be their own future, for true humanity to regain hold over the world 
loving the environment more than children is what truly eradicates it, as compared to children, the environment is shit 
loving animals more than children is what truly obliterates them, as compared to children, animals are shit 
loving possessions more than children is also what's destroying true humanity, as compared to children, possessions are shit 
today an adult looks at a baby and is concentrated on how their teeth are growing, yet looks at some animal, or a tree, and is filled with awe. this is wrong priority. the only adoration they have for children is how they're growing into that same thwarted reality, succumbing to evil. I just saw a short documentary where some village was being shown. first was a short frame of three children standing motionless 20 feet away, followed by three in-face close-ups on three adults. yet this thing that adults became because of loss of their true humanity, is falsely being blamed on immaturity, instead of the other way around. children are the only truly human beings. everything negative that adults say or think about children, is the opposite of truth, and the truth about adults. adults will shun and ignore children while admiring this evil which they have become 
adults live in this fake, adult world of theirs, blind to the true horror that the human race is in, which they are making worse while glorifying this evil, finding awe solely in nature which they are destroying and shaming, horror that is infinitely more horrible than anything they can imagine, because they no longer know what true beauty is 
children have the healthy, true relationship with one another, and between females, males and two-spirits, children truly love each other, due to inability of a child to love oneself. children have extremely negative reaction to mirrors and pictures of themselves, instantly looking away and pushing it away. they will hail one youngest child by holding them up and spinning them around (or spinning a child in a carriage, for instance) counter-clockwise, which brings the hailed and the hailers great joy, thus their preference for everything counter-clockwise, thus showing the true nature of humans, our own conception as this "supreme" and as the only way to retain true humanity. it's the adults' exersion of control, teaching and constant moving them around which leads to disruption of this relationship and ability to create their own, true and good language and culture, later being replaced with fake 
they are put in constant bondage, constant cage, being deprived of their touch with nature and other children, they are being held like trophies, beaten, shouted at, taught tricks, humiliated, and generally treated with total lack of respect and sensitivity, and being used as pawns by the media 
so look at the smallest of children and see, what true humanity is 
predecessory hate is the only kind of hate there can exist, without it there would be no hate, loss of belief in that is loss of belief in inherent true good. whenerer you look to the right, send hate, hate and hate, all the curse words and signs you remember but were taught not to use. when you get rid of that hate, you'll uncover the truly human part of them, and regain your inherent love for inherent true humanity. the one children see so they smile. when you look to the left, send love, love and love. it's hate that turns to fear if not let out, not the other way around. it's the reversal of sides to which love and hate naturally belong that turns to this fear, which adults have an incredibly lot of, and more and more. we are inherently fearless. it's this tremendous fear, hate and jealously that adults have about inherent true humanity that they're putting on children. they no longer believe in humans as inherently capable of endless creativity and will adopt the falsities of talent and experience, as they have lost true creativity themselves.  
don't teach them, don't exert supremacy like tapping them on the head, don't bondage them, don't talk to them, but listen.  
so children who are "misbehaving", (and the real kind, the kind you see in the real world, not the falsified media), like attacking solely the things which are our biggest enemies: computers, television sets, speakers, ripping apart paper, wallets, our collections etc. and looking at things like an exercise bike with joy, as exercise is healthy, they know exactly which things are good and bad for us, not the other way around 
they will throw things out of the carriage or crib, desperate to be let out; take off clothes showing how we need to get rid of the bonds put on us, climb furniture to show us that true humanity is above this fake world, which adults value more, they will refuse to eat or bath knowing it is wrong priority, they will tell a different age or name than their own, to show us it's not what makes us, and insistently speak of animals and possessions as shit or likewise, which compared to where our real priorities lie, that adults have abandoned, those things are, and thus abandoned everything else making it turn to shit, they will desperately try to make adults rid themselves of the guilt, because that evil did not come from being one's true self, but from being made not to be, and believe they wouldn't normally be capable of any of this evil, and instead of tremendous good 
so children who are still children, and they are so since conception, are the only ones who care for the human race and thus the planet 
lend yourself completely to the smallest of children, they are being the truth that is inherent 
lend yourself completely to them, follow them absolutely, give them freedom to be with nature and other children, freedom belongs to them 
 
it's the only way that we all can heal, the environment can heal, and children can create infinitely more beautiful worlds based on true humanity, without shaming the environment and animals, and partake in endless creativity, love and beauty 
can you envision a world with millions of different cultures and languages, cultures not based on lies, constantly being created anew, by children, coming from true humanity? and a true, healthy relationship between males, females, and two-spirits? where everyone is extremely healthy is every way, there's no loss of memory and thus our true humanity, and no disease? 
 
 
so the problem is maturism, false belief that we are becoming human by maturing, or being taught so by adults, due to loss of belief in inherent true humanity, and inherent good, thus it's a belief in false humanity as a humanity. thus any pretense can be created by anyone on what that maturity is, but it always means the opposite of being truly human, and the definition getting further and further away. they are completely taking away children's rightful freedom to take control of our culture, which is the only way to rid it of true evil. the effect of maturism is creation of a false goal for one great unity with everyone the same, which not only depraves us of our true humanity, but only leads to destruction as new ideas are being created on what that is. which is exactly what is happening with the world. from villages to towns, from towns to cities, from countries to unions, exerting control, constant policing. everything which is in disruption of creating this "one great unity" is seen as wrong, even though it's only our reaction to this evil. it also creates false belief that everything that happened in the past which was in the goal of this "great unity" can't be wrong. we are further becoming less and less truly human with things like loss of belief in abortion as murder and showing more and more extreme negativism against children, they are becoming a worse and worse stereotype, it is more and more in every film, documentary, newspaper and news broadcast, and outside. but only a child is the true individual, capable of creating new, true language and culture, and with complete understanding and love for other humans. today all the things are blamed on children, instead of this adult thing which isn't human, further exerting control of adults over children and strengthening the grip of this evil against true humanity, because they are no longer themselves being led by true humanity. there is less and less distinction between people, and between females, males and two-spirits. 
a person once came to me, he seemed desperate to affirm the superiority of the adult and was insisting I call him sir, after I adamantly refused, defeated, he went and murdered oneself, so in reality, these people are very fragile. their constant exertion of control and superiority is their only way that keeps them from seeing themselves as this great failure and maybe ending it all, feeling powerless against it 
adults have this extremely negative view on children, which is in fact, the truth about themselves, and will constantly try to make their child believe they're the ones who are evil 
everything today seen as "conservatism"is what kept the world from coming into greater and greater evil. instead of trying to understand this affect of the adult which caused all the shit and rectifying it, it went on the wrong way, creating a falser and falser humanity 
that's the reason behind all "mental illness" and a lot of disease, fight to retain true humanity, and the only true mental illness and disease is the adult 
long, long ago, when my old grandfather, before he died, no longer having any memory at all, looked at me and he truly smiled, for the first time since I first met him. nobody saw him do this before. it's because he rerecognized true humanity that shines from a child 
 
 
 
 
here is an example of the evils of maturism, as is our world, maturist propaganda is all around us: 
 
"what we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and the reproduction of our race ... so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the universe. ... peoples that bastardize themselves, or let themselves be bastardized, sin against the will of eternal providence." 
-adolf hitler 
 
 
maturism is the true evil behind all evil, this evil that is today's world and evil of the past. only our own true voice, one we were conceived with, the one with truth, is true humanity, that is in connection with our conception, and is capable of true, endless, creativity. immaturity is the only true humanity 
 
 
 
so put the inherent truth everywhere you can, write it on walls, shout it, vandalize, spit, piss and shit and curse on this world, it's all shit, everything around us is shit compared to our number one priority, children, the true humanity, otherwise everything turns to shit 
stop this wrong of the adult, wrong of believing in thoughts, theories and philosophies instead of the inherent truth which is in children 
every child is conceived with complete love and understanding for other human beings, and ability to create new language and culture 
more than that, a child is conceived with love of true humanity itself, with no love of false humanity which leads to this love of "great self", mostly due to unnaturality of humans being so connected together, instead of truly or at least partly flourishing apart in small groups 
RE: When?

Written by SteveCamper on 2008-06-12 13:25:20
To comment further, if I understand correctly, if you download only it is a $500 per dl regardless of the program you use. If you use a peer-to-peer such as bittorrent, it has upload built into the protocol such that while you download, you also are uploading. The fine for uploading is $20,000 per ul. So... that means if you used Bittorrent to DL a digital picture , just for an example, you get charged $500 for the DL and $20,000 for sharing it back up again if you did not acquire the copyright owner's permission to do so (which may not even be the artist who made the work in the first place)! This is absolutely absurd as to how this could have even made it to the House for first reading!
I will not stand for this

Written by Mike Pelletier on 2008-06-12 13:31:45
If this bill passes, I am willing to have myself arrested, if that would mean it could be challenged in court, or simply as a form of protest. cdndmca@mkp.ca
Tor Time!

Written by Tor on 2008-06-12 13:34:45
Tor ([ link ]) is a software project that helps you defend against traffic analysis, a form of network surveillance that threatens personal freedom and privacy, confidential business activities and relationships, and state security. Tor protects you by bouncing your communications around a distributed network of relays run by volunteers all around the world: it prevents somebody watching your Internet connection from learning what sites you visit, and it prevents the sites you visit from learning your physical location. Tor works with many of your existing applications, including web browsers, instant messaging clients, remote login, and other applications based on the TCP protocol.
My letter to Jim Prentice

Written by Jason Walton on 2008-06-12 13:34:48
The American DMCA has many faults, but one of the more serious faults found within is the so-called "anti-circumvention law". This law essentially makes it illegal for Americans to bypass electronic locks, or "DRM", on content they own. Such a law gives unlimited power to content owners, and strips any and all rights from consumers, even rights explicitly laid out in law. This is not a "fair and balanced" approach to copyright. 
 
Before we pass a similar law here in Canada, we must first ask ourselves what the purpose of such a law would be? The industry groups tell us that these locks are meant to protect against piracy, and that anti-circumvention legislation is therefore required to protect their intellectual property. If the goal is to prevent consumers from copying software, movies, and music, then we need pass no further legislation, for these acts are already illegal in this country (with the obvious exception of the private copying act of 1998). The act of copying such intellectual property is already illegal, and there is little sense in making it "more illegal". 
 
DRM has extremely dire side effects. DRM stands for "Digital Rights Management", and that's exactly what it does; it controls what rights a consumer does and does not have over the media the consumer has purchased. But these are rights determined by the content provider, not by law, and the revocation of these rights becomes the province of private industry, which has already demonstrated a total disregard for consumer rights. 
 
For starters, there exists no DRM scheme which does not also generate vendor lock-in as a side effect; music purchased on Apple's iTunes Music Store can only be played on computers running Apple's iTunes software or on Apple's iPod line of portable music players. Some DRM schemes, such as Microsoft's now defunct "PlaysForSure", are lice sensed to multiple manufacturers. However, even though you can buy multiple players from different hardware manufacturers that support PlaysForSure, when purchasing one of these players you are essentially locking yourself into Microsoft's music store. 
 
Microsoft's PlaysForSure is an excellent example, by the way, of the problems inherent in a DRM scheme, because Microsoft has recently closed its authentication servers down [4]. This means that millions of people who bought music from Microsoft can no longer move that content to new audio players. If these consumers loose their existing audio players, or their players or computers break or are sold, then all of the music these people have purchased - music which they own - will be irretrievably lost. The only option these people have is to buy the media they already own a second time. 
 
By enshrining digital locks and DRM in law, you ultimately give license to the content industries to write their own laws where copyright is concerned, because any rights given to consumers, even rights given explicitly under law, can be revoked by the application of a digital lock. Rights such as the "first sale doctrine", the ability to enjoy content on the player of your choice, the ability to format shift media from one format to another; all of these are taken away by almost every existing DRM scheme. 
 
Many DRM schemes, especially in the realm of computer software, do not explicitly enumerate which rights they revoke in a clear and transparent manner to the consumer. Many times consumers are not even aware of the restrictions imposed upon them until they attempt to breach those restrictions. Rarely are consumers trying to breach these restrictions with criminal intent. 
 
It is also important to point out that most such electronic locks are ultimately pointless; as soon as a single user bypasses the lock and posts the content to the internet, the content can easily be copied by all. Such locks will also always be easy to bypass because, from a technical standpoint, the underlying principal of such a lock is inherently flawed. All DRM schemes are based on encryption. Encryption, at it's most fundamental, involves one party sending a message to a second party without the message being intercepted by a third party. With DRM, the message is a movie or music or software, the first party is the content producer, but the problem is that the second and third party are both the consumer [3]. If media is protected by a digital lock, then the key to that lock must be provided to the consumer in order to watch the media. However, if the consumer has the key to the lock, then he or she may use that key to copy the media as well. DRM is as impossible as perpetual motion machines, or faster than light travel. Anti-circumvention laws, in effect, are laws which tell consumers they are only allowed to use the keys given to them for specific purposes outlined by the supplier of the key. This also leads to bizarre situations, such as the legality of publishing certain numbers [5]. 
 
Finally, I will touch briefly on the chilling effects such a law has on security research. As already noted, all DRM schemes are ultimately based on encryption. Some notorious breaches of DRM technologies in the past, such as breaking DVD-CSS - the protection scheme used on movies distributed on DVDs, did not involve the use of the key hidden in the player, but instead relied on breaking the underlying encryption algorithm. The DMCA makes the breaking of such encryption algorithms a crime. Security research is a critical part of keeping this nation and its people safe, and it is often the case in this field that critical advances are made by finding flaws in the existing state of the art. The American DMCA certainly does not make this impossible, but it also certainly makes this more difficult [1][2]. 
 
The anti-circumvention provisioned of the DMCA are almost universally panned as being some of the worst legislation ever written. Please do not hobble Canadian industry, innovators, and consumers with similar legislation. 
 
Jason Walton 
 
[1] [ link
[2] [ link
[3] [ link
[4] [ link
[5] [ link ]
Written by on 2008-06-12 13:44:22
So if they are going to make it illegal to bypass any DRM, and the Sony rootkit was a poor attempt at DRM... 
 
Does that mean removal of the Sony Rootkits would not be possible under this law?  
 
So what happens if a virus writter adds DRM to his virus? We have to live with the virus?  
 
How do you define removing DRM? If I unistall M$ Vista which was pre-installed on my computer, and install a more costomer friendly OS, am I removing DRM from my computer?
smoke

Written by cynical on 2008-06-12 13:46:03
Drug is illegal and then you can buy it on any city's corner. Cars flies on the streets without any police control. Where is the police? There is a big shortcut since Canadian big cities are too expensive for a policeman salary. Who is going to enforce all these new laws?
This bills is not designed to pass

Written by Tim Meehan on 2008-06-12 13:49:08
This his still has to go through committee (LOL that will be fun) and back to the house, and then the Senate. I can see an election happening long before this becomes law. 
 
Politically, this is pretty stupid to roll out, but I think Harper is feeling heat from the Americans. 
 
In the scrum at the announcement, there were deflections over questions over whether a kid remixing and uploading a song to YouTube would be slapped with a $500 fine. I think they know they are vulnerable on this: Vernier suddenly developed a hearing problem and Prentice was a bot. 
 
And I do think people will hold this one against the government if it mirrors the DMCA. Remember when there was that outrage over Rogers' negative-option billing? It's not wise to mess with a Canadian's media. :)
Written by Ben on 2008-06-12 13:53:16
I'm no lawyer, but the Bill seems to make it illigal for a child to rip thier parent's CD to thier mp3 player, after all, the child isn't the owner, the parent is.
retrograde law

Written by Vanni on 2008-06-12 13:54:12
lets see. illegal to UNLOCK a cell phone? That is _all_ they sell in Europe. Pick one up there 90Euros. Unlocked. There is no law that says you cannot buy an unlocked phone. CD to iPod. There will never be an enforceable law that says that i cannot store my CD on my iPod. There is no enforcebale law that you cannot move vinyl to digital. The gov't has no business in the bedrooms or living rooms of the nation. The tories will be defeated for thsi draconian law at the next election! !
sick to my stomach

Written by Adam Antoszek-Rallo on 2008-06-12 13:55:31
highlights from the bill: 
 
- With respect to audiovisual material such as films, the format-shifting provision would apply only to videocassettes and would not allow you to make copies of material stored on other media, such as DVDs. 
 
EVERY NEW "RIGHT" APPLIES TO VHS TAPES ONLY IN THE BILL!!!!!!!!!!! 
 
 
 
- You could not circumvent or hack a technological measure (digital lock) to make a copy. 
 
ANY DIGITAL FORMAT WITH COPY PROTECTION IS ILLEGAL TO CIRCUMVENT FOR ANY PURPOSE!!!!!!!!!!! YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS TO CONVERT THE FORMAT OF A FILE IF IT HAS ANY FORM OF PROTECTION! NO RIGHTS! 
 
 
 
If you acquired the original material in digital form (e.g., a digital picture or digital book) from an online source and entered into a contract that limits the way you can copy it (such as the number of copies you can make regardless of the number of devices you own), you would have to honour the terms of that contract. 
 
- EVEN IF YOU HAD ANY RIGHTS, WHICH BY THE LETTER OF THIS BILL WE ALREADY HAVE NONE, ANY DISTRIBUTOR CAN VOID YOUR RIGHTS IN THE EULA!!!!!!!! 
 
 
 
- If you entered into a contract with your service provider expressly prohibiting or limiting your ability to make recordings of on-demand programs, you would have to honour the terms of that contract to the extent that it restricts this provision. 
 
TIME SHIFTING RIGHTS TOO ARE VETOED BY THE EULA!!!!!!!!! YOU CAN ONLY TIME SHIFT, UNCOMPRESSED, UNENCRYPTED, NON-PROTECTED SIGNALS THAT YOUR EULA ALREADY SAID YOU COULD TIME-SHIFT!!!!!!!!! WE GET NO RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
 
 
 
- However, if you hack a digital lock to enable any kind of infringement, (e.g., hacking the anti-copying mechanisms of a computer game to make an unauthorized copy), you would be subject for up to $20 000 in statutory damages. 
 
YOU COULD BE FINED $20,000 FOR TRANSFERRING YOUR ITUNES PROTECTED SONGS TO A CD!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
 
 
 
- In other words, when an ISP receives notice from a rights holder that one of its subscribers is allegedly hosting or sharing infringing material, the ISP is required to forward the notice to the subscriber and to keep a record of relevant information (e.g., the identity of the alleged infringer). ISPs that fail to retain such records or to forward notices would be liable for civil damages. 
 
IF YOUR ISP ALLOWS YOU TO USE AN ANONYMOUS IP, THEY COULD BE LIABLE FOR CIVIL DAMAGES? IS THIS THE START OF CRIMINALIZING ANONYMOUS IP ADDRESSES???? 
 
 
 
- Users could not provide, market or import devices or provide services to enable hacking. 
 
UNLOCKING OF CELL PHONES WOULD NOW BE CRIMINALIZED? WE CAN ONLY USE THE CORPORATE PROVIDER OF THE PHONE AND NEVER CHANGE PROVIDERS BY LAW WITHOUT BUYING A NEW PHONE? ARE THEY SERIOUS? 
 
 
 
I am, in all honesty, shocked. This is unbelievable. I think this may be even worse than the earlier rumored draft. Wow. My stomach is sick.  
 
-Adam
Thank you Jim!

Written by J. Canadian on 2008-06-12 13:56:36
Thank you prentice, harper and those from the Big Business Inc and the US that wrote this bill for them. This bill will demonstrate abundantly to the Canadian people that the harper neocons are little more than sell-outs and agents of foreign powers. 
 
People, do everything you can to explain to your friends and family of voting age exactly how the current government is out to screw the Canadian people. Mr. Dion, give it a some time to fester and then pull the plug. The harper neo-con-artists have sowed the seeds of their own political demise. 
wow

Written by Concerned on 2008-06-12 13:56:57
I wonder how much the Industry ( Music / Motion Picture )is paying Jimmy Boy, 
 
Someone is pocketing some money for taking these rights from the customer. 
 
SOMEONE is and everyone knows that. 
 
what is happening with Siemens in europe paying politicians etc is happening here.
Question

Written by Kevin B on 2008-06-12 13:58:21
I have a question about some terms of the proposed law... 
 
Under "Private Copying of Music" there is the limitation that "You could not circumvent or hack a technological measure (digital lock) to make the copy.", yet under ..."(unless the circumvention was for private, non-commercial purposes)"...  
 
This seems to be contradictory... I can't create a copy of something that is protected by a TM, yet the damages would not seem to apply if the copy was for private purposes. Does anyone else know what's going on here?
Addition

Written by Kevin B on 2008-06-12 13:59:41
Sorry, that was supposed to be: 
 
yet under "Technological Measures (TMs) or Digital Locks" it is stated that ..."(unless the circumvention was for private, non-commercial purposes)"...
idiotic

Written by Tim on 2008-06-12 14:02:22
I know that this bill has a snowball's chance in hell of making it as a law, but if it does I'll probably pack up and move to New Zealand for a few years until we can get a responsible and representative government again. It would be the last straw as this bill is plainly appeasement for American industry, with no regard for our rights as Canadians.
dave02150

Written by on 2008-06-12 14:02:34
Thank you, Jim Prentice! 
Thank you for finally opening my eyes and letting me see - I've never felt so inspired in my whole life. Thank you Jim Prentice, for you, and you alone, have done what no other politician has been able to - you have made me into ... an activist!
Protest Letters

Written by Lee on 2008-06-12 14:03:01
Is there a website we can get a protest letter to print off to mail into to our local MP's to protest this bill? Any other ways we can let the government know how Canadians really feel about this!
The kid uploading tu youtube example

Written by Cyborg on 2008-06-12 14:09:57
In response to Tim, the way I read the law, the kid uploading a remix to youtube is not liable for 500 $, but for between 500 and 20 000 $, since this falls under the file sharing part, and not the private copying part of the bill...
C-61 Protest

Written by me on 2008-06-12 14:56:42
[ link
 
great idea as the poster makes the claim that it also makes all your vhs tapes illegal. 
 
We should dump a million tapes on parliament hill.
Written by on 2008-06-12 14:57:33
Cyborg, 
 
Unless the remix includes tunes that were hindered by DRM then it'd be  
between 500 and 20 000 + 20 000 for the drm. And a remix using more than one song......
Canada eh?

Written by JDM on 2008-06-12 15:10:37
I used to point to the surveillance society in the UK, and the virtual police state the US is becoming/has become and be able to proudly say As a Canadian it doesn't happen here. Well - I was wrong and it does, and I am becoming ashamed of my country, that was once the shining example of fairness and equality to the world. This is just one more crack in a once beautiful place as it deteriorates in to corporate government and regulatory dictatorship. I used to think that Quebec was being treasonous in wanting to break up this great country. Well, now I think maybe they just saw the handwriting on the wall and were interested in self-preservation as our own government is destroying what took so long to build.
Confidence

Written by Craig on 2008-06-12 15:14:27
Will the vote on this legislation be a matter of confidence?
email addresses for MPs

Written by Jim R on 2008-06-12 15:15:58
Something tells me that one or two of you may find this useful :-) 
 
Enjoy 
 
Email addresses for MPs: [ link ]
Cons ask Canucks to Bend Over

Written by Canadian Music Lover on 2008-06-12 15:16:34
Dear Mr Harper,  
 
Besides your marching orders from the USA and it's DMCA, what else do you have on your iPod? 
 
Ridiculous legislation that is a huge step backwards for consumers. 
 
Who voted these idiots in? It certainly wasn't me. 
 
does any one else feel sick?

Written by mc12sideddie on 2008-06-12 15:18:51
I don't know what to say right now other then after reading the "Fact Sheets" I feel nauseous. A small part of me was hoping that the bill would really be a non-issue and that the "CDMCA" angle was just over-dramatizing the entire thing. As an artist, musician, and "consumer" of media i'm utterly shocked and horrified thinking about the ramifications if this passes.  
 
Anyways, this is just my initial reaction. I never thought I would turn activist but I can't see any better a time.
Probably not VHS either...

Written by Chris S on 2008-06-12 15:19:08
If you have your own VHS tapes that you made, you can likely format shift those - that's 29.21(1). 
 
But paragraph (c) makes clear that no circumvention can be involved in order to make this happen. Since most pre-recorded VHS tapes have Macrovision codes on them, that would need to be circumvented for recordings to happen. 
 
So - you cannot copy your private VHS collection to anything - recordable DVD or media PC - for your own personal use.
Police state, indeed...

Written by Akston on 2008-06-12 15:20:33
To the guy who suggested TOR, I hope you start running a server - TOR is incredibly slow for browsing, forget downloading unless a lot more people start participating. Y'all might want to hook up with PeerGuardian, though. And don't forget to disable fallback on your encrypted connections. If you're into that sort of thing. 
 
Anyways - a question for Michael, how does this affect Fair Use provisions, if at all? And what about the licensing fees on media that Copps introduced. Didn't the conflict between those fees and the previous attempt to introduce the DMCA sink that bill? Thanks for educating the rest of us, cheers. 
 
statismwatch.ca 
 
Torrents

Written by Yet another Kevin on 2008-06-12 15:20:36
Haven't seen this above. Given that a torrent downloads bits of a file from multiple sources, would this therefore be considered to be a single, or a multiple violation?
Written by international on 2008-06-12 15:22:42
I would just mention that a bill including anti-circumvention measures is necessary for compliance with the WIPO treaties that Canada signed years ago. That is, it is not the Americans per se, it's the international community in general, that forced these laws on Canada when they wrote the WIPO internet treaties in 1996.
I am now a criminal

Written by on 2008-06-12 15:25:21
With my collection of recorded tv show I am now suddenly became a criminal. Thank you very much Jim for matching me with pimps and drug dealers.
Written by EJ on 2008-06-12 15:26:56
I just wrote my MP about this and I'd encourage everyone else to do the same. 
 
This bill is the dumbest thing I've ever read, and I have read most of it so far. 
 
I can't understand how the Conservatives think this is ever going to pass, but write none the less, just in case.
Word of the Day

Written by Chris S on 2008-06-12 15:28:58
From [ link
 
"The government said a second reading of the legislation wouldn't occur until the next sitting of the house. With the government breaking soon for the summer, such a reading would not occur until the fall." 
 
The word is "prorogue".
Treaties

Written by Aron on 2008-06-12 15:29:17
@international 
 
If I could count the number of treaties that various countries have agreed to but not adhered to, I would. Even if we do adhere to it, 
 
A) To what extent do we need anti-circumvention measures, and what should the punishment be? 
B) How do we build in provisions to protect the rights of the consumer and to protect valuable pieces of our culture from being rendered useless by faulty DRM?
how much

Written by how much on 2008-06-12 15:30:36
how much is Jim Pretience getting from the Music Movie Industry 
 
that Canadian public should be aware of all Money londering that he is getting for this
Written by Margaret on 2008-06-12 15:31:32
This bill makes watching legally purchased DVDs on my home built personal video recorder running Linux illegal and probably the same applies to TV shows. I don't own a TV so this makes my TV replacement illegal. Way to encourage me to purchase cultural products! I will never buy another DVD or cultural product, nor will I purchase a TV if this bill becomes law. Never mind what this bill will probably do to my research. I'm writing to my MP again. 
 
Did anyone else get a bogus message from Prentice claiming all kinds of wonderful things were going to come from Bill C-61... and conveniently failing to mention the anti-circumvention sections that take these new rights away again?
Fair Use/Dealing

Written by Matt Schneider on 2008-06-12 15:32:33
Akston: It doesn't affect Fair Use at all, as Canada does not have Fair Use regulations. Instead, we have Fair Dealing regulations, which are much weaker than Fair Use and difficult to use as a defence. 
 
That said, the biggest problem with this legislation is that it would prevent a user from circumventing DRM. At that point, the damage to Fair Dealing could range from minimal to total. If a content provider chooses to allow a user his or her full rights under Fair Dealing, then that user would have no problems. If, however, as is likely to happen, a content provider uses DRM to prevent a user from doing something that would be covered by Fair Dealing exceptions, then the damage to Fair Dealing would be huge; regardless of a user's rights under Fair Dealing, a user that it put in a position where he or she has to circumvent DRM in order to do something Fair Dealing would allow would be in trouble for circumventing the DRM, even if the DRM is overly restrictive. 
 
So in answer to your question: If we can trust all corporations, then there is no need to worry; if you harbour even a fraction of a doubt in the goodness of corporations, then I would, contrary to Douglas Adam's advice, panic.
Written by Zeeman on 2008-06-12 15:34:59
Of course you could just get two 8Gb USB keys. Load one with a linux system, leave the other blank. 
Take a home PC, remove the harddrive. Insert the two USB keys and boot the system off of the USB stick.  
 
Download what you want to the second USB key. When your done shut down the PC and remove the USB keys - the only thing that proves the download is on the USB keys.  
 
Since there is no harddrive nothing is left on the PC.  
If anyone shows up at the door with a warrent, burn the USB keys in a microwave for 30secs and show them the diskless PC. 
 
 
 
a minority ruling a majority

Written by paradox on 2008-06-12 15:37:00
@how much 
As much as it takes to retire since all conservatives are soon going home (but I think that was in their plans from the beginning since they still do not believe they got so far as to run Canada).
Stopping this thing

Written by Paul on 2008-06-12 15:39:59
I run a large network of websites dedicated to expanding the uses of devices you purchase ie. iPhones, PSP\'s, Xbox. We have never promoted or aided in acquiring copyrighted works but some of the tools used to break the digital locks on these devices could be used for that as well (most of my users don\'t pirate). This would obviously cripple my business if I am no longer able to host these tools. 
 
What can I do to help stop this bill from becoming law? Obviously writing letters to Jim Prentice and my MP is a start but I\'m hoping to do more. I have very large dedicated user base and would like to mobilize them. Is there any resource link for people wishing to aid in protesting this bill with a list of the players involved? Are any protests being planned? Does anyone have any recommendations on utilizing this highly effected user base? (the user base is around 400k, 15% Canadian)
Letter from the govt

Written by geg on 2008-06-12 15:41:45
I received the following, biased email from Prentice earlier today: 
 
The Government of Canada has introduced Bill C-61, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act. The proposed legislation is a made-in-Canada approach that balances the needs of Canadian consumers and copyright owners, promoting culture, innovation and competition in the digital age. 
What does Bill C-61 mean to Canadians? 
 
Specifically, it includes measures that would: 
 
 
expressly allow you to record TV shows for later viewing; copy legally purchased music onto other devices, such as MP3 players or cell phones; make back-up copies of legally purchased books, newspapers, videocassettes and photographs onto devices you own; and limit the "statutory damages" a court could award for all private use copyright infringements; 
 
implement new rights and protections for copyright holders, tailored to the Internet, to encourage participation in the online economy, as well as stronger legal remedies to address Internet piracy; 
 
clarify the roles and responsibilities of Internet Service Providers related to the copyright content flowing over their network facilities; and 
 
provide photographers with the same rights as other creators. 
 
What Bill C-61 does not do: 
 
it would not empower border agents to seize your iPod or laptop at border crossings, contrary to recent public speculation 
 
What this Bill is not: 
 
it is not a mirror image of U.S. copyright laws. Our Bill is made-in-Canada with different exceptions for educators, consumers and others and brings us into line with more than 60 countries including Japan, France, Germany and Australia 
 
Response to Zeeman re: Liunx on a stick

Written by Tim Meehan on 2008-06-12 15:48:28
Zeeman wrote: 
 
"Download what you want to the second USB key. When your done shut down the PC and remove the USB keys - the only thing that proves the download is on the USB keys." 
 
With encryption, of course. They can still get the IP records from the ISP with this bill, and ISP clearly become common carriers. There are a lot of ramifications to this bill - I am still digesting it.
The anti-circumvention provisions need t

Written by Myriam on 2008-06-12 15:48:58
Let me see if I get this right. If I want to put a movie on my iPod, I now risk a smaller fine if I download a movie with its copy-protection already removed ($500) than if I buy the DVD and remove it myself ($20,000). Suddenly I foresee a decline in my DVD buying habits, which, somehow, I don't think is was the intended goal. 
 
Also, it's now illegal to watch DVDs on Linux, because you have to break CSS to do so. Nice bill, Prentice.
Maybe this will work

Written by Robert on 2008-06-12 15:54:46
I have come to the conclusion that the conservative minority is completely ignorant to the facts of reality. People are going to circumvent media restrictions and integrate their content into other devices and formats, it is a defined trend that is continually increasing in size and velocity that ignorant legislation will have little effect on. These are the realities of our digital age. 
 
I have therefore elected to forego writing Jim Prentice because it is impossible to penetrate a skull so thick and sure footed. Rather, I will write to his cat, Mr. Jingles, in hopes that this animal has a better understanding of voter sentiment and our digital reality. 
 
If anyone wants to join me heres the address. 
 
TO: The Honourable Jim Prentice's cat Mr. Jingles 
Suite 105 
1318 Centre St NE 
Calgary, Alberta T2E 2R7 
403 216-7777 
Fax 403 230-4368
Written by fedge on 2008-06-12 15:55:36
Things I'll still do if C-61 passes: 
 
- make MP3s from my CDs (thankfully there are no DRM CDs made anymore) to put on my MP3 player 
- record programming from my cable feed on my PVR and archive on DVDRs (my PVR disregards broadcast flags) 
- copy DVDs by breaking CSS and putting them on my MP3 player 
- copy DVDs to DVDR backups 
- use lossless tools to convert iTunes purchases to formats I can use 
- convert vinyl to MP3/WAV/FLAC 
- download MP3/WAV/FLAC of vinyl albums I already own 
- unlock MY phone and do whatever I chose with it - it's MINE 
- etc 
 
If I get fined, I'll refuse to pay. If I get arrested I'll refuse to cooperate. If I go to jail, I'll rest comfortably knowing I'll be provided three meals daily which is more than some people enjoy in Canada these days.
Educational Provisions

Written by Janice on 2008-06-12 15:56:45
As an educator, the provisions really worry me. I'm already legally able to do what they're touting as a feature of the new law (share a fair use amount of copyright material in a virtual classroom or print off from a digital copy provided via interlibrary loan). And I have to chuckle that anyone thinks we need a new law to let us share material that's freely available on the internet. We've been doing it for year via hyperlinks, thank you so much, Minister Prentice. 
 
But they're suggesting that DRM trumps fair use that really worries me: scores of scholars who write about in-copyright material could find themselves frozen out of publications or teaching opportunities if the fall afoul of the copyright-holders. If this passes, we'll only be able to teach what the big multinational corporations want us to say about the properties they own or see prohibitions hedge us in further.
Videocassettes only?

Written by Jason Walton on 2008-06-12 15:56:48
The part about only being able to format shift video from videocassettes is a bit... weird. Why on earth would you do that? Why does it matter what media format the source is on? 
 
As the bill stands, format shifting from old laser discs or Video-CD would be illegal (I have a few video-CDs around). Format shifting DVDs to your iPod will be illegal (even for the few DVDs without copy protection). Format shifting music DVDs onto your iPod would be illegal (which would totally suck, and make concert DVDs a lot less appealing to me). Once DVD becomes an obsolete format, it will still be illegal to format shift your content onto more recent media.
Can we circumvent iTunes DRM under C-61?

Written by Matt Schneider on 2008-06-12 15:57:17
I am not a lawyer, so I'm not sure if I'm reading this properly, but doesn't this paragraph say that it's okay to circumvent DRM on your iTunes songs, so long as you're doing so in order to listen to them on a non-Apple MP3 player? 
 
41.12 (1) Paragraph 41.1(1)(a) does not apply to a person who owns a computer program or a copy of it, or has a licence to use the program or copy, and who circumvents a technological measure that protects that program or copy for the sole purpose of obtaining information that would allow the person to make the program and any other computer program interoperable. 
 
The only reason I would circumvent the DRM on my old iTunes files is so that I can listen to them on my Creative Zen. Would this protect me, since I'm doing it for the sole purpose of making them interoperable?
Activism

Written by Nick on 2008-06-12 16:00:08
We Should all burn a CD of downloaded music, or a movie and mail it to Mr Prentice's office.  
 
Think that will get his attention.
Re: Can we circumvent iTunes DRM under C

Written by David F. Skoll on 2008-06-12 16:03:13
I don\'t think you can circumvent DRM on an MP3 song to play it on a non-Apple MP3 player unless you can convince the judge that an MP3 file is a \"computer program.\"
Mail

Written by Saskboy on 2008-06-12 16:03:49
I agree, we should mail Prentice a lot of material explaining how this is an unwelcome law. This might be the issue that actually makes apathetic kids care about good governance. 
 
Unfortunately my blog is broken today, what bad timing that was.
I'm gonna become a criminal

Written by MovieBuff on 2008-06-12 16:12:39
I have an extensive Media library all legally purchased .... 1000's of CD's and over 500 DVD's all of them ripped to harddrives, for the purpose of protecting my investment (backups - one onsite, one offsite) and for realistic management via a media server. I've had to break drm on pretty much everyone of them. I'm gonna be liable for millions of dollars for all the copyright 'infringement' that i've done to safe guard my investment. 
 
If my rights to protect my investment are lost then i have little interest in protecting the rights of the copyright holders.... I'll be on the sneakernet, carrying a terrabyte harddrive to my friends place and letting them copy what they want.
This is discouraging..

Written by Yatti on 2008-06-12 16:13:28
I can honestly say, I thought the days of these crazy bills were over... I guess I was wrong.. I voted for Harper... For all the people hating the conservatives... Can you guys honestly say that you would rather the Liberals be in power right now?
Prentice

Written by Hal on 2008-06-12 16:16:07
Anyone know if Prentice has any children, because I bet they have an iPod or other such mp3 player and I bet it contains plenty of potentially illegal music, videos, etc.
Written by on 2008-06-12 16:16:28
but this is not law yet right?
C-61

Written by Brett on 2008-06-12 16:17:50
Good deal for the government and industry - they no longer have to go after people selling copyrighted material: they can just go after everybody. 
 
(a former Tory supporter)
Reconsidering Business Plans

Written by Aaron on 2008-06-12 16:17:57
Wait a minute! 
 
I\'m working on starting an affiliate marketing type business promoting products associated with SF TV Shows and Movies. I\'ll be doing this by writing reviews, and such. I need to have access to TV Episodes and Movies at my own convenience, for as little amount of money as possible. Plus I need to be able to archive them. You can\'t do this with DVRs as they have space limitations. And if I can\'t record and archive, I can\'t do my job properly. 
 
So if I understand this bill correctly that means that my future business practices will either become illegal or impossible.  
 
This is kind of counterproductive to the copyright holders as I\'m wanting to sell their material to make THEM money, and all I\'m asking for, is a little piece of the retailer\'s pie. A very little piece.  
 
C\'mon. I\'ve just discovered a golden opportunity to make money and enter the the arts & entertainment world...only to find out it might get taken away from me. Unless of course I become a \"cog in the almighty wheel\". 
 
This bill is just a bunch of double speech, and should never be passed. 
 
I\'m definitely writing my MP.
YOU SHALL NOT PASS

Written by Sean on 2008-06-12 16:18:11
We need to get organised, get writing, and get vocal. 
 
Dr. Geist has all kinds of good resources here.  
*Please* take the time to write your MP, the PM, and this Prentice character- let them know your views on this issue. If enough Canadians take the time to write, it might make a difference. 
 
I'm going to write to members of the Opposition as well. 
Anyone got a link to some good boilerplate?
Blank media levy

Written by Matt Schneider on 2008-06-12 16:19:59
According to the CBC ([ link ]), this bill is extending the reach of the blank media levy. But doesn\'t that seem dubious, given that this same bill would outlaw the activities the levy was meant to compensate for? Seems to me that this is quite the case of double-dipping.
Mac and Linux users Would become crimina

Written by Farrell J. McGovern on 2008-06-12 16:27:23
With the new law, it is going to be illegal to bypass any "digital" locks that a content creator/publisher puts on their work. 
 
One of these systems that is used by some Record companies prevents you from coping a CD on a Microsoft Windows machine. The way that it works is that it automatically loads up a program when you put the CD into the computer that prevents the transferring of CD's music to either your computer or Ipod. This is known as Digitial Rights Management or Copy Protection. 
 
But what if you a Mac, or a Linux machine? 
 
As the software that is automatically loaded from the CD to prevent you copying only works under Microsoft Window, it would thus be illegal to put that CD into your Mac, as it would be a "circumvention of the copy protection" on the CD. 
 
This law is stooopid! 
 
ttyl 
Farrell
Canadian DMCA

Written by Doug Webb on 2008-06-12 16:29:22
It is so sad to see Harper and the conservatives proving beyond any doubt that they really are that stupid. What can you expect when you elect a government of ignorant superstitious peasant farmers.
I Really Hope This Is Dropped

Written by Jeff on 2008-06-12 16:32:33
This really does not sound like a uniquely "Made in Canada" solution as has been suggested by the ones putting this through; it seems to be no more than a harsher version of the severely archaic American Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It's disappointing to know that our government has decided to cater to international pressure instead of applying a solution that would better accommodate the current status quo in Canada. 
 
It makes me question what really separates the Liberal and the Conservative governments on the issue of copyright legislation. Each party has shown that they would rather push through a controversial copyright bill, instead of discussing with the Canadian people and with experts on the issue of fair copyright legislation. The only aspect that is different between this Conservative copyright bill and the Liberal's Bill C-60 of 2005 is the severity. Neither have attempted to facilitate the needs and desires of the common Canadian person. Neither express a true understanding of modern technology nor of the operations of Internet Service Providers (who, needless to say, don't seem to be privy to this discussion). Both disregard the rights of Canadians in both the Privacy Act and in the Fair Use stipulations of current copyright legislation.  
 
This bill would rather criminalize the activities of thousands of Canadians - from the child who listens to his or her music on the medium of his or her choice, to the elderly couple who have missed their favorite show and have saved it on TiVo or downloaded it through the internet for when they're able to watch it. Is this really worth it? Is watching a TV show at a different time or listening to music on any medium you choose (not just the mediums companies force you to use), bad enough to be claimed a crime requiring an outrageous fine?  
 
It doesn't further creativity or help artists or authors when their fans are criminalized for appreciating their work.
boilerplate - not

Written by Jim R on 2008-06-12 16:37:25
Sean, I just spent the better part of an hour crafting an email to my MP (David Emerson) and the industry minister, CC'd to the NDP and Liberal industry critics. I suggest that something "straight from the heart" will get more attention than a reworked boilerplate letter.
Organize NOW!

Written by Organize NOW! on 2008-06-12 16:37:32
Organize NOW! 
 
Create a plan of attack that is extremely easy to implement at the grassroots level and START NOW! 
 
We have a few months to really turn up the heat and we should not waste it. 
 
Ideas: 
 
- Create a central OPEN and ACCESSIBLE location and use it as a rallying point. NOT a Facebook page or anything like that. Something OPEN to everyone. Mom, Dad, Grandpa... get it?! 
 
- Create commercials (infommericals) and post them to YouTube 
 
- Create a simple pointed list that clearly illustrates the ugly parts (like there is anything good) about this bill. Show people what they could and will lose. Give them real simple, real life examples 
 
- Start informing EVERYONE on your address book about this legislation. 
 
- Create email Signatures that illustrate the horrible nature of the bill. Again, simple real life examples. Plus projec tinto the near future and offer some examples of how this legislation could be used to stifle a democracy 
 
Drop a line if you\'re interested. talkimposter@gmail.com
Written by DVD Guy on 2008-06-12 16:40:30
Even better question, will the DVD rental companies have to keep detailed records, and what if you are an avid watcher of movies, will the IP Police knock down your door to see if you've copied them. 
 
Police state, draconian, those are mild words
Written by fedge on 2008-06-12 16:46:54
I just called Jim Prentice's office. The conversation was like so: 
 
ME: Is Mr Prentice in the office? 
 
secretary: I am not allowed to give out that information. 
 
ME: OK, may I speak with Mr. Prentice? 
 
secretary: He is not in. 
 
ME: Ahhhha! You just broke a rule of the office of Jim Prentice! 
 
secretary: Yes. 
 
ME: Are you sorry you broke that rule. 
 
secretary: Yes.
Written by Margaret on 2008-06-12 16:50:37
Copyright For Canadians has a boilerplate letter: [ link
 
I made extensive revisions to it before I sent it to my MP. Canada doesn't need a made-in-the-USA bill which criminalises research, review, critique, parody, and time and format shifting while claiming to uphold all of these things.
Written by on 2008-06-12 16:53:02
DVD Guy, 
 
Not if you keep renting the same DVD's over and over again. I mean c'mon everyone knows that people who only rent a movie once are copying it...
Copyright and Piracy Current Laws

Written by Geoff Dewhurst on 2008-06-12 16:55:28
According to the current Canadian Legislation for software piracy and copyright violations only the RCMP or the Department of Justice can lay criminal charges should they be warranted after an investigation of the “allegations”. 
 
According to most legal firms, unless the RCMP or the Department of Justice lays charges you need to have very deep pockets full of cash, a battery of legal council and years and years of patience in order to successfully prove piracy or copyright violations. 
 
So for most companies or individuals, excepting Microsoft, Adobe, and other very large companies, unless the RCMP or the DOJ investigates and lays charges the pirates and copyright violators win! 
 
Since the RCMP enforcement policy is that “copyright piracy must be on a commercial scale – meaning commercial infringement by a manufacturer, wholesaler or importer” companies that have their software pirated, reversed engineered, distributed to other companies without legal licenses will not ever get prosecuted! 
 
The above quote is an excerpt from the letter I received after submitted a 9 page summary document, 30 appendixes of documented breaches by the alleged perpetrators, plus 11,000 files of actual breach logs, files, notes on reverse engineering, etc to support the allegations. 
 
Since action speaks louder than words; awarding large contracts to the pirates (who incidentally host MERX), while doing everything to destroy the source of the “allegations” it appears that the Government of Canada supports software piracy and copyright violations when they benefit from the action. 
 
So making changes to the current laws will DO NOTHING to CHANGE THE STATUS QUO! 
Two words for Prentice & the Cons:

Written by Frank on 2008-06-12 16:55:29
'bye, bye! 
 
 
(Oh, and of course the other two as well).
Wow .. !

Written by Carl on 2008-06-12 17:01:29
Basicly we are loosing you're right for the profit of american studio ! 
 
Fantastic ...
Let the Tories be free

Written by Tom on 2008-06-12 17:06:30
I voted for Harper et al. They were a change from our natural governing party. Harper has now lost my vote, and an election can't come fast enough. A sad day. 
 
Stephen, if I had wanted to live in the USA, I would have moved there long ago. You go instead, but leave Canada for Canadians.
?

Written by Popular oxymorons on 2008-06-12 17:08:07
"Under the proposed copyright legislation shouldn't the Conservative government be fined for copying legislation?"
Conflicting messages

Written by Cubey on 2008-06-12 17:09:52
Jim Prentice just appeared on CTV News and said that the bill will *not* make it illegal to copy content that you buy to your iPod or other device. He also states that the bill makes it legal to record a TV show, where it was illegal previously.
Written by Bor on 2008-06-12 17:12:28
So to the Americans, who are constantly complaining, the conservatives get to look like they are doing something. And a "rising star" and potential rival to Mr. Harper gets his name all over a really unpopular piece of legislation. 
 
Win Win for Mr. Harper it seems.
DMC-Eh?

Written by _Griphin_ on 2008-06-12 17:12:49
I can see a law which goes after people that make money selling copywritten work (music/documents/movies), but why go after a person making no money from copyrighted work? I also don't get why there imposing these new laws when we already pay for taxation which protects the musician. I wonder if consumers can start a class action lawsuit against the Heritage minister?
re: Conflicting messages

Written by Stewart Clamen on 2008-06-12 17:26:32
@Cubey 
 
Jim Prentice just appeared on CTV News and said that the bill will 
*not* make it illegal to copy content that you buy to your iPod or 
other device. He also states that the bill makes it legal to record a 
TV show, where it was illegal previously. 
 
Based on my untrained reading of the "Fact Sheets", Prentice is not 
lying, merely misleading. 
 
It would not be illegal to copy to your iPod if one of the following 
is true: 
 
- You are copying music from a non copy-protected CD you purchased 
- You are copying video that you converted from a videotape 
 
 
It would however be illegal if you had to bypass a "lock" or 
encryption to make the copy. Some examples: 
 
- Decoding a video or audio stream from a DVD (DVD content being encrypted) 
 
- Decoding a video or audio stream from your digital video recorder if 
that recorder records the data in an encrypted manner, or if the 
media provider denies you that right in the Service Agreement you 
agreed to when you purchased/renewed the service, or if the 
"copy-protection" flag was set by the broadcaster 
 
 
 
Prentice is hiding behind weasel words

Written by Karl Stevens on 2008-06-12 17:31:52
Cubey, Prentice is technically correct - the law does not (explicitly) make it illegal to copy content to your ipod. 
 
What it does is make it illegal to have *tools* that could copy content to your ipod. 
 
It's perfectly legal, but you're just not allowed to possess anything that could do it.
Written by r3m5 on 2008-06-12 17:41:03
Good Bye Canada
He also said

Written by Bor on 2008-06-12 17:41:32
In that quote, Prentice also said that currently recording shows is illegal. I doubt this to be true. 
 
In any case, \"hiding behind weasel words\" is lying. A definition borrowed from the Merriam Webster online dictionary \"2 : to create a false or misleading impression\"
lead on maccain

Written by lead on maccain on 2008-06-12 17:41:52
so thats how that guy in montreal got busted selling dvdrs 
after a very short investigation 
using the current law  
what was his name  
MAVEN 
the above person is lying abot times to go after , times to investigate and all of it. 
DVD Regions!

Written by Philip P. on 2008-06-12 17:42:04
I honestly can't believe what I am looking at. 
The bill looks so sweet and nice to the consumer (count the number of times they use the word 'enjoy' in the fact sheets) on the first glance, but if you bother to read the legal wording, it royally stinks! 
 
Above and beyond what has already been mentioned here, the thing that gets me the most is making it illegal to play out-of-region DVDs. 
 
Some of the _best_ films in my collection are legitimately purchased DVDs that are in a different region (mostly region 2). The reason for this is often as simple as the fact that only the re-made version was released in North America, or the North American version has a soppy ending, or a re-dubbed language track, or was simply never sold here. Right now I am able to watch them on my DVD player which I have turned to region 0, but soon that will be illegal. (Actually - will it? The manufacturer inserted that 'hack' right into the firmware, and tells you how to make that change in the manual...) 
 
I equally upset with the other changes, including: 
- Digital lock provisions (you can rip your VHS tapes to PC, but not your DVDs...) 
- Unlocking cell phones (It's my damned phone! If I want to unlock it, you sure as HELL aren't going to stop me!) 
- Changes to the downloading/uploading laws (It was actually rather good to have it as downloads are legal, uploading is illegal. Meant that those of us who downloaded to try something out, or to listen to something before we spend an arm or a leg in HMV or the like, were fine but those people who provided the content (were actually breaking the copyright) were the only ones deemed to be breaking the law.) 
 
In short, I like the some of the changes (such as making it explicitly LEGAL to digitalize a book or magazine to put on a portable machine! I love that!) but the majority of this bill royally stinks, and gets my extreme disapproval, and gives me (yet another) reason to dislike our conservative government.
whatever

Written by Me on 2008-06-12 17:43:44
Bill c-61 is clearly modeled on the DMCA. While I may agree that we need to have a conversation about copyright reform in the digital age, as far as I can tell ordinary Canadians have not been consulted (only lobbyists, the CRIAA and foreign politicians). The current government is in love with creating new laws that create new criminals for previously legal activity.
Petition Against?

Written by Brandon Cirella on 2008-06-12 17:43:45
I, for one, am immediately contacting my MP in opposition for this bill, but we _need_ to take action and make sure this does not pass into law. A formal petition, maybe?
2 bits

Written by on 2008-06-12 17:44:32
i would laugh if this goes through and he has a child with a ipod and they get charged
Interoperability

Written by Jason Walton on 2008-06-12 17:45:29
[quote]I am not a lawyer, so I'm not sure if I'm reading this properly, but doesn't this paragraph say that it's okay to circumvent DRM on your iTunes songs, so long as you're doing so in order to listen to them on a non-Apple MP3 player?[/quote] 
 
@Matt Schneider: 
IANAL, but I don't think so. The provision you mention talks about making programs compatible with other programs, and says nothing about making media compatible with other programs. I think, as written, this legislation gives content owners the right-to-non-interoperability, with the exception of software developers.
I hear crime

Written by David M on 2008-06-12 17:50:16
I use Linux on 3 computers - Should I report to a detention centre now? 
Or just paint my life grey? Also - the Chinese food restaurant I eat at played a CD in the kitchen load enough for me to hear - I do not believe they have a license allowing for this. Who should I report them to for rehabilitation?  
 
If I were to be nice to Prentice

Written by Chris on 2008-06-12 17:53:51
You know, rather than assuming Prentice is an itiot, or being paid off for this bill... 
 
We could assume that he is purposely writing the most blatantly terrible legislation with the INTENT of: 
1) ensuring the legislation will NEVER pass, and  
2) keeping the lobby groups happy
due process©

Written by JelloB on 2008-06-12 17:54:16
 
Every form of repression has a form of underground. It doesn't matter. Go back to your lives, wait for the new channels, they'll become apparent soon... 
 
=)
Furious

Written by Andrew L on 2008-06-12 17:54:54
I had hoped this bill would never materialize. I had hoped that my country wasn't actually being run by U.S. big business. I had hoped that the other parties in my county would stand up for the people THEY serve. 
None of this is happening and I'm furious. So angry that I will do everything in my power to ensure that the conservatives don't pass this and are NEVER in power again. 
I implore everyone who values the copyright freedoms we have today in Canada to read about how things are working out for people in the U.S., the U.K, France, etc. I'll tell you now that it's not good. 
I don't want to be like those countries. I want to live in a country where rational, logical thought is what decisions are based on and that those decisions have only the rights and freedoms of the people in mind. Business is important yes; but it's also business that's destroying our planet and our societies. 
Fight. Fight for what you want or you'll have nothing. My eyes are fully open now...
Take 2 minutes to sned your message

Written by Andrew L on 2008-06-12 17:58:46
Take a second to send the letter on this site to your local MP. 300 voices may be heard. 3000 will be heard. 30,000 will be heard and their message remembered. 300,000 will be given what they want.
And the link is...

Written by Andrew L on 2008-06-12 17:59:44
[ link ]
Circumvention measures

Written by Andrew on 2008-06-12 18:02:03
I haven't read through the whole thing, but I was looking at least at the section 41 regarding circumvention for the purposes of interoperability with software (under a broad definition of this, Linux based DeCSS type tools should fall here) - based on what I was reading, it IS LEGAL to circumvent and use circumvention tools if you are doing it for the purpose of a legal circumvention. 
 
However, I have yet to see an exception that would allow recording/time-shifting of a show that has the 'do not record' flag. Now under normal circumstances this flag should only be set for PPV and VOD services, but there's nothing stopping broadcast TV from doing so (other than the loss of goodwill from viewers and probably ad revenue). 
 
I'm also wondering if there's a specific provision regarding unlocking cellphones (I have yet to come across it), or is this just a result of the generic do not bypass digital locks rules? And would not unlocking a cellphone fall under the interoperability of software functions again?
region-free dvd player

Written by paradox on 2008-06-12 18:02:06
@DVD Regions! 
I own a JVC region-free dvd player legally purchased at Future shop. Does it mean that now my player is illegal?
WRITE YOUR LETTER NOW!

Written by Fred on 2008-06-12 18:06:26
Write to YOUR MP. 
 
Write to YOUR MP. 
 
Don't waste your energy on anyone else right now. Right to YOUR OWN MP.
Making the whole internet illegal?

Written by Jay M. on 2008-06-12 18:09:09
I'm gonna have to agree @David M., all this makes Linux almost illegal. It won't know how to use the CD copy protection, they are usually designed to exploit Windows systems. Too, I doubt MythTV or like products will bother to notice a broadcast flag. Even still, a 3rd party open source driver for non-open source hardware may be considered to be breaking digital locks. If deemed illegal, we pretty much have to dismantle the internet; it runs on Linux. They are practically supporting proprietary software that can hide its sneaky methods behind EULAs. 
 
@Chris 
One could hope. Perhaps in the same sense that Jack Thomson makes such a joke of video game law that he is getting disbarred. Wouldn't it be nice if that were true?
Non-issue

Written by Martin on 2008-06-12 18:13:02
Whatever. There are fines for jaywalking and speeding too, but I've never had to pay one. The kids smoking dope in the park near my house appear to do it with impunity. 
 
The law, as with most that don't involve physical injury or invasion, is basically unenforceable.  
 
Get creative, people. Hint: . Backup to the Torrent network, which is probably the most reliable RAID anywhere. 
 
One word: Protest

Written by sandman on 2008-06-12 18:14:00
I have made my displeasure with this crap that the jackass we call Prentice thinks is a good piece of legislation. I urge you all to write to your MP and to Prentice himself. Lets get up in arms on this one.
Wording for Interoperability

Written by Andrew on 2008-06-12 18:17:35
41.12 (1) Paragraph 41.1(1)(a) does not aply to a person who owns a computer program or a copy of it, or has a licence to use the program or copy, and who circumvents a technological measure that protects that program or copy for the sole purpose of obtaining information that would allow the person to make the program and any other computer program interoperable. 
 
>> This to me reads like it's perfectly acceptable to decompile/reverse engineer in order how to break a DRM schema if the intended purpose of doing so is to modify the program to allow for it to operate with another program. However, they fail to define 'computer program'.  
 
Paragraphs (2) and (3) go on to repeat similar wording an apply it to the tools in order to do so, and distributing devices that would allow a person to do so, as long as the purpose is interoperability. Paragraph (6) takes away these rights if you commit an act of infringement in doing so - which sounds like a circular argument to me, unless I'm missing something? 
 
41.13 provides similar exceptions for encryption research. 
41.14 provides exceptions for spyware (third party information collection - HI SONY ROOTKIT) 
41.15 provides exceptions for security researchers 
41.16 provides exceptions for the disabled 
Written by mike on 2008-06-12 18:18:47
If fall is the 2nd reading, is it possible that this bill is just postering, to make that Tokyo agreement the real objective of all the groups?
Written by Andrew on 2008-06-12 18:21:25
@mike and Chris 
I'm also in general hoping that this bill is primarily posturing to satisfy the US Industry lobbyists and that it will never actually be passed into law. A 'hey look, we tried' - that is actually the 'Made in Canada' solution. Let the American lobbyists think that they have control when really we're still just doing as we will.
Michael Geist, what can we do?

Written by Magoo on 2008-06-12 18:26:42
Michael, what can we do to: 
 
1) fight this bill, and 
2) protect our privacy in the event the bill is passed?
Long live the VHS

Written by Jake on 2008-06-12 18:38:13
Love the exemptions for VHS. Time to become a VHS distributor. Long live the tape.
Write Your MP

Written by Chris T on 2008-06-12 18:42:25
I have written a letter to my MP stating my displeasure with this bill. I urge you all to do the same. If you care enough to read and comment here, take the 5 minutes to write your MP and give him/her the ability to fight this with numbers.
ISPs

Written by Ray on 2008-06-12 18:43:09
The take down notices may be similar to those in the US, but unlike the US we have not been provided with put back rights. In the US it is not unknown for a take down notice to be issued not for copyright infringement, but to freeze out comments and criticism. The new Canadian provisions give no protection from bullshit infringement claims.
Written by mHannon on 2008-06-12 18:43:44
Prentice's copied parody of American law should be the first case tried.
URGENT @Chris on 2008-06-12 17:53:51

Written by Phil on 2008-06-12 18:43:45
Chris on 2008-06-12 17:53:51 said: 
If I were to be nice to Prentice 
...  
We could assume that he is purposely writing the most blatantly terrible legislation with the INTENT of:  
1) ensuring the legislation will NEVER pass, and  
2) keeping the lobby groups happy" 
----------------- 
 
CHRIS!! CONTACT ME ASAP!! I have marvellous bridges for sale at give-away prices!! Hurry - they're going fast!!!!!!! 
 
CDMCA

Written by Dana on 2008-06-12 18:44:05
This is going to make my Samsung DVD player with the MPEG codec illegal to use.  
 
Disabled

Written by Nattt on 2008-06-12 18:47:37
I think it's disgusting the disabled can be allowed to break DRM, and not able bodied people. This is gross discrimination. It just goes to show that this is not about copyright, not about downloading and file sharing - all the stuff that Prentice wants to make out it's about, but about control. Control of media. Why should the disabled be allowed to break DRM locks when other people are not? This is not to sound heartless, but there should be one law for everyone. If it's good enough that disabled people can break DRM then it's good enough that the rest of us can.
Written by Andrew on 2008-06-12 18:54:14
@Nattt 
 
The exceptions for disabled is to make the program operable for the disabled. I'm not familiar with what sort of application this might be (perhaps a text to speech program for an ebook?). But it's not a general exception to willfully break DRM.
Plausible Deniability?

Written by Uncle Bubba on 2008-06-12 18:54:18
I wonder if, should this abomination actually become law, you could protect yourself by placing an open wireless access point on your home network. 
 
Solicitor: You, Mr. User, downloaded 375 Madonna and Prince songs! Aside from your questionable taste, you're a CRIMINAL! 
 
User: Sorry, Mr. Solicitor, but that wasn't me. Must have been some evil miscreant that connected to my wireless system without authorization. Can you prove it was me? 
 
Solicitor: Maybe, but first we need your TrueCrypt keys and passphrase. 
 
User: My what? That's not an encrypted volume---it's my collection of random entropy data from my GPS. I don't have any hidden data. 
 
...and so on. 
 
I wonder how this would turn out? 
 
Written by Patters on 2008-06-12 18:55:33
The more I read it and read analysis on this bill, the more I realize that it would be rediculous for something with such a large NEGATIVE impact on the entire Canadian population to pass. 
 
But then again... never say never.
Bill C61

Written by J Sabater on 2008-06-12 19:06:08
Just for clarity, Michael, what's wrong with legislation that complies with the international standard set forth in the WIPO agreement? 
 
It's true, this bill proscribes a number of practices that are now common, but these practices are also contrary to the intent of WIPO, are they not? So what's wrong with enforcing a law? A toothless watchdog doesn't protect anybody. 
 
CDMCA

Written by Dana on 2008-06-12 19:06:42
What will be the point of paying for high speed home connections anymore? Vid sharing sites will all be criminalized. Gaming would appear to be the last reason to have a high speed connection.  
 
I pay for 60 Gigs of transfer right now but there's be no point if it passes.  
 
ISP's could see a drop off in their revenues.
Lies anyone?

Written by Fraken on 2008-06-12 19:12:12
Is it just me who is absolutely steaming mad about the entire (claiming that it did not exist) thing beforehand? I physically phoned Mr. Prentices office a week or two ago and asked "is there currently or a planned bill to be introduced". The answer was a flat out "there is no such bill, I dont know what you internet people are so wound up about, it doesnt exist." 
 
Your office flat out lied to my face Mr. Prentice and there is no dodging the issue, your cohorts left a trail of that exact lie in a public place (wikipedia) as standing proof. 
 
Once again, no accountability.  
 
Written by Jimmy Holiday on 2008-06-12 19:13:35
Congradulations Mr. Prentice,  
 
You have succeeded in making me feel ashamed to call myself a Canadian. You are either too out of touch with the digital age to realise the ramifications this bill holds, or you are just tabling it to appease the american lobbyists(under the assumption that it will get stricken down). Either way you look like a fool. Too dumb to know what you are doing or too spineless to stand up to american interests. Given your stance on the Bell throttling controversy i'm guessing it's the former.
WIPO: the big deception

Written by cynical on 2008-06-12 19:19:19
WIPO is an international agreement like the Kyoto one which USA and Canada so not want comply for example. Most of European countries the do not have, do no want and are not going to complay with WIPO. An international agreement is not soementhing that YOU HAVE to follow at any cost even againtst your own people rights.
Written by mHannon on 2008-06-12 19:23:58
"A toothless watchdog doesn't protect anybody." 
 
Yeah, but a letting a t-rex loose in a school yard is overkill. None of this rubbish is necessary to comply with WIPO. It\'s not even necessary to comply with WIPO, since it was obsolete when it came out (in the fax era). That was 13 years ago, which is about 10 lifetimes in the tech world. 
 
Rules that criminalize everyone for legal and legitimate uses, or preventing people from protecting themselves by removing harmful products (ie Sony\'s rootkit) are stupid, and it\'s incompetent of prentice to create this swill when all of these issues are KNOWN problems. 
 
Bad legislation is bad legislation, whether or not it complies (or over-complies) with some international treaty.
Writing to MP

Written by Ludditte on 2008-06-12 19:27:04
My soon to be ex-MP (conservative Charlesbourg)got my message. Here's hoping the liberals grow a spine and finally toss out the bums. There is a big change coming in the US and Canada should do the same.
@ J. Sabater

Written by A.E. Newman on 2008-06-12 19:32:15
J. Sabater said: “It's true, this bill proscribes a number of practices that are now common, but these practices are also contrary to the intent of WIPO, are they not? So what's wrong with enforcing a law?” 
 
I’m sorry, come again? At what point in fascist insanity did WIPO become a world supragovernment with the ability to legislate law? WIPO is nothing more than an international business consortia IP lobbying group operating under the guise and auspices of the U.N. in order to give it cover. 
 
What you describe is undoubtedly WIPO’s ultimate aim and sane people must ensure this never happens. 
Treason

Written by on 2008-06-12 19:32:29
Few Canadians have voted in conservatives to dismiss the libaral goverment thought corrupted. Next time choose the lesser of two evils. I consider treason far worst then corruption (which is the norm in politics anyway).
Insulting!

Written by Average Joe on 2008-06-12 19:38:08
Doug Webb said: "It is so sad to see Harper and the conservatives proving beyond any doubt that they really are that stupid. What can you expect when you elect a government of ignorant superstitious peasant farmers." 
 
That is an insult to ignorant superstitious peasent farmers everywhere! And even they're not dumb enough to support this bill. 
 
Amazing!

Written by Daniel Kristjansson on 2008-06-12 19:48:05
I did not think it was possible to draft a more daft law than the DMCA, but it really is. I remember when the DMCA was being considered in the USA and I don't my friends, "Don't worry idiotic bills are proposed all the time in Congress, this will never pass." We all know now that as soon as the ISP exemption was added it sailed through Congress. 
 
I'm conservative when it comes to traditional rights so don't think DRM should be outlawed, but it's a mind-boggling concept that a DRM work should enjoy copyright or any other legal protection intended for published works. Allow DRM for private documents. But allow anyone to work to break those locking mechanisms for securities sake, don't restrict my right to publish how insecure systems might be broken, and, for heavens sake, do not grant copyright to works under a DRM protection scheme! Those works neither need the years of special government protection, nor do they deserve this special treatment when they are not in any real sense published. 
 
The DMCA's anti-circumvention clauses have been used as an anti-capitalist club to prevent competition in fields as varied as printers and garage door openers, while also being used as an anti-democratic tool against people who wish to expose voting fraud. Do Canadians really oppose capitalism and democracy so vehemently that they need any even stronger tool in their fight against them?
bs

Written by Ryan on 2008-06-12 19:49:43
I just hope everyone else here is also mailing there MP, Ministers Prentice and Verner
Written by Bo on 2008-06-12 20:00:30
Anyone else got an unsolicited email from Prentice & co? I got an email to an undisclosed email address of mine on rogers. Its kind of address I use for friends and family only.
Internet Broadcasters

Written by FP on 2008-06-12 20:01:12
There does not seem to be anything in the legislation regarding the subject of internet broadcasting, webcasting, or "internet radio" as it is often called. US legislation has pretty well shut down small broadcasters, since to operate in compliance with the law, licensing costs for copyrighted (and even public domain) content have been stipulated at highly unrealistic levels, leaving the small broadcaster potentially paying (proportionally, on channel basis) much higher royalties than commercial radio stations and even satellite broadcasters. In brief, webcast royalty rates have been a subject of heated debate over the past year or so. But what does the new legislation mean for webcasters based in Canada? In the US, SoundExchange ostensibly collects and distributes digital rights royalties paid by webcasters. In parallel,the recording industry has done a rather effective job of lobbying the US Copyright Royalty Board to set rates for webcasters that are quite extraordinary. I wonder what the future holds for us here in Canada?  
Which makes me wonder how the new legislation addresses material from a satellite or webcast source being re-broadcast in my home (and I guess, my immediate neighborhood) with Wi-Fi over my personal network.
Record Industry Bill

Written by on 2008-06-12 20:02:33
Say hello to the BOUNTY HUNTER bill.  
 
So what's stopping the record company from hiring a 3rd party company to go out and sue people en-mass. $500 a title. Not bad mark-up. 
 
It would be a lucrative new business model.  
 
PCs will not be ReElected

Written by Jay on 2008-06-12 20:03:09
This bill makes me sick! I just wrote an email to my MP so hope it helps. 
 
I believe that if this becomes law, it will saverly hurt the PCs chance of re election. I am pro PC right now, but if this bill passes I'm voting for someone else!
Lobbiests Get their way

Written by scam on 2008-06-12 20:04:21
 
 
... So no more Region 2 movies - that I buy legally ??? ...  
 
Tariff 19

Written by Captain Canada on 2008-06-12 20:07:21
Hi Michael,  
 
Thank you for being a voice of reason in this insanity. 
 
How is tariff 19 affected by this amendment? I notice that it does not appear to be rescinded which opens up interpretations such as: 
28.1 - tariff 19 would imply consent under all circumstance. 
 
Thanks again!!  
you rock. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Canada -> drain

Written by JR on 2008-06-12 20:13:09
If this law passes I'll be looking seriously at moving to Iceland.
Me

Written by Support Innovation on 2008-06-12 20:18:18
 
[ link
 
I discovered SopCast - which is P2P Television - people are uploading local tv broadcasts and streaming them.  
 
[ link
 
This is front line innovation - the same type of innovation and inventions the Gov is working with Hollywood to stop. 
 
Remember how dangerous Mp3's used to be! It was going to shut down the industry. But now Apple and the record companies make BILLIONS off the work of people who had visions of a new way to distribute content.  
 
Why should big business have the only say in how we work with content? 
 
Our Gov. should support innovation and not that of building walls.  
 
P2P Broadcasting - the next MP3?  
The new witchhunts

Written by JR on 2008-06-12 20:25:13
Copyright Infringement seems to the be the 21st Century form of the Witchhunts. Communism was the 20th Century form.
Written by Brammer on 2008-06-12 20:28:42
Get active people. Write to your MP! 
 
[ link ]
What the F**K?

Written by on 2008-06-12 20:35:43
This is just a Trojan horse to implement the ACTA... 
 
If they sign this... say goodbye to any personal rights. Anyone can search your premises, PC, etc. without a warrant, based on \"alleged\" behavior. 
 
Beware of the ACTA!!! And stand up!
bill-c61

Written by on 2008-06-12 20:54:37
It\'s simple, I voted for the harper government last go around and I will not make that mistake again!!!! I\'am talking to everyone I know about bill c61. It\'s amazing how fast the word about bill c61 can get around amougst parents in a school yard (WE ARE NOT AT ALL HAPPY WITH THIS)!!!!
We hang the petty criminals...

Written by pissed off canuck on 2008-06-12 20:56:22
...and elect the major ones to public office. 
 
Prentice and his cronies are traitors to the country. They sold us out for suits from abroad. 
 
*sigh* Hanging politicians for high treason doesn't happen enough these days...
ON PARLIMENT

Written by STRIKE on 2008-06-12 21:11:59
SOMEONE SCHEDULE A STRIKE/PROTEST on PARLIAMENT, I"LL BE THERE ALONG WITH 200 Others I know.
Written by on 2008-06-12 21:18:17
You can talk, you can talk, you can bicker, you can talk, but it won't change a thing. Dion's gonna let it pass, just like everything else. Everything you do will be monitored from hereon in; don't be surprised if you are retroactively punished, either.
Written by on 2008-06-12 21:19:41
I voted for Harper last time. Was planning to again. If the Liberals are smart they will defy Dion and vote this one down. If they do, maybe I'll support them. Canada should not be a police state.
Missing the point

Written by It's a Game on 2008-06-12 21:23:02
This is the switch and bait bill. 
 
Remember when Lying Brian introduced the GST at 9%? People howled, they screamed, they wanted Brian's head on a platter. Later on he brought GST down to 7% and everyone was quiet. 
 
Watch.. right now this is the most draconian piece of legislation you've seen. When Parliament resumes in the Fall, you will see another "Bill 61" a less harsh, more "consumer friendly" bill, one that is probably slight less draconian then what we have here... and it will pass. 
 
Should be an interesting summer of Spin though
Opposition Parties

Written by mad on 2008-06-12 21:28:45
well, what i did was leave comments on CTV News website, e-mailed my MP(who is Liberal),Jack Layton (leader of NDP party) and Gilles Duceppe (leader of Bloc Quebecois). just google their names and click on "contact". i think the only way to stop this is for EVERYONE to get the opposition parties to join together to defeat this bill, which they have the numbers to do. please, do it now and lets swamp them with complaints.
Implications to the National Archives of

Written by GM on 2008-06-12 21:32:02
Do this apply to the National Archives of Canada? Do they not preserve content by transferring information from old media formats to newer ones? 
 
There goes history! :(
Fair Copyright For Canada

Written by ENO on 2008-06-12 21:34:13
Facebook group "Fair Copyright For Canada" has gained 4,000 people in just one day (yesterday it was 40,000 today is almost 44,000). Spread the fight. Let's them have a test of what will happen on election time.
illegal to "distort or mutilate a copyr

Written by Buzz on 2008-06-12 21:39:50
Regarding it being illegal to "distort or mutilate a copyright performance"... So if I have a radio with really crappy reception, am I a criminal? Or am I even allowed to change the radio station? Is stopping a CD mid-song mutilating the performance? 
 
:)
Copyright

Written by Scott MacQuarrie on 2008-06-12 21:42:23
These changes are a good thing. 
 
As a professional photographer, copyright is my primary asset. These changes further support the protection of my work, which means someone can't use it without my permissions, even on their website. This also means people can't take your facebook or myspaces images either.  
 
Copyright laws are designed to protect the individual artist, which is exactly what these changes are designed to enforce.
Holy molley

Written by Dylan on 2008-06-12 21:46:40
This is bad news. All I can hope for, is that Australia doesn't follow suit. 
Not that it would stop me, but still it's not a good thing.
Written by on 2008-06-12 21:57:20
Scott, did you read the entire thing? 
 
This bill is ridiculous. Copyright is good. But imagine if someone sued you because possessing a computer could be used to break their copyright. Is that fair? 
 
The $20,000 bucks for uploading I can actually see as fair. The rules on circumvention are not.
sharpies

Written by dude on 2008-06-12 21:57:59
I had a question related to the circumvention of digital locks placed on media. If this law effectively creates a ban on the tools which can be used to circumvent copy protection, does it outlaw markers?
This is Great News

Written by Rocco Rumpapalli on 2008-06-12 21:58:30
Wow, it is about time that the record industry and movie industry get some money for all the hard work. I cannot wait when they begin to start entrap everyone with fake music/video files and start recording everyones ip addresses and start asking ISP to start recording and collecting everyones information( I guess privacy laws are now dead too) then start fining these kids $500. The industry is going to make tons of money now!!! I am going to start using TOR anonymizer and Scr@w Everyone!!!
Hope this doesn't pass!

Written by Matt on 2008-06-12 22:04:42
I really hope you canadians rally before they try to take away an excess of your rights. 
 
If I understood right, they'd still have the download tax even though you can't even download with these rules, too? 
 
How the hell does that pass? How does Canada even end up signing an ACTA treated as well like this?
This changes are frightening

Written by David Ramey on 2008-06-12 22:10:47
The notion that my internet activity will be monitored to verify that I am not a criminal, and that I do not become one is extremely frightening. 
 
While the banking that I rely on is encrypted, I send and receive private information to my friends and family via email. I do not consent to have my thoughts and my words shared without my knowledge and yet this legislation is designed to specifically defeat my expectation of privacy. I wonder if I can copyright my Email to protect it from this interrogation. 
 
It might be just me, but I would prefer legislation to stop the 10+ adds per day for Viagra and other prescription medications that swarm my various email accounts daily, the daily deluge of email to account names that are "close" to mine and the alerts to the epidemic of small penises in Canada. As a parent, the pervasive and unstoppable flood of pornography on the internet is much more of a concern for me. Frankly, I see downloading a song as minor issue when compared to a search for Bambi that returns a link to Bambi's Hot day at the Beach. 
 
I will be sending my MP an email indicating that I will not support this legislation, that I will not support a party that passes this legislation and that I will not tolerate decision making within a vacuum. 
 
David Ramey 
therortical dollars trump rights?

Written by STUDMUFFINx on 2008-06-12 22:11:40
Well i guess its pretty clear who the conservatives are in bed with... 
In a country where it only takes like 1000 votes to get voted in/out as a MP how can the conservatives really think pissing off anyone with the internet or who uses technology is a good idea? (Look at what happened on the south park where the internet goes down)  
 
One would think they would know better then to really really piss off the future generations of voters. But i supose bowing to american intrests pretty much trumps the big picture eh? Not to mention there blatant disregard for net neutrality...
Written by Fat Tony on 2008-06-12 22:20:04
The frightening thing is that this could pass. The majority of the MPs don't understand the technology behind a pencil much less the tech behind VCRs, MP3 players, PVRs, CDs, DVDs, etc. They vote however their party leaders tell them to do, believing they're doing what's best for Canada because Harper said it was, then go and graze the taxpayer meadow whilst making baa baa noises. It just makes me sick that this can pass due to their exceptional ignorance. The MPs no longer represent the voters, they are employees of the people who finance their campaigns. One day you won't have the MP from Calgary North, you'll have the MP from Tim Hortons or the MP from CN Rail.
DMCA

Written by John Thomas on 2008-06-12 22:30:34
You are not kidding! Quick, everyone download LimeWire and Morpheaus and get ALL the FREE music you can get before its too late! Arrrgh! 
 
JT 
[ link ]
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, Terence Corcoran is a

Written by Bober on 2008-06-12 22:42:33
[ link
 
A bill to save Kill Bill rights 
Terence Corcoran
AAA, Terence Corcoran is at it again!

Written by Bober on 2008-06-12 22:44:18
[ link
 
A bill to save Kill Bill rights 
Terence Corcoran
AAA, Terence Corcoran is at it again!

Written by Bober on 2008-06-12 22:44:44
Again from Financial Post! 
 
[ link
 
A bill to save Kill Bill rights 
Terence Corcoran
WTF

Written by Sunchicken.com on 2008-06-12 23:09:08
If anyone wants to see the Media Press Conference with Jim Prentice I now have the Video up on my Website.  
 
Is that going to be illegal in the future?!!! Oh well I think people need to see Mr. Prentice choke and witness how out of touch he is when being asked questions that pertain to this day and age. 
 
[ link
Written by Paul on 2008-06-12 23:14:08
What I find extraordinary about this piece of legislation is how it reveals just how powerful the US government and corporate media giants are. That they could coerce our government into introducing such a hated piece of legislation is truly amazing. To do it without consulting their own citizens - depriving us of our rights to create mercantile gain for foreign interests (check out the members of CRIA if you doubt that). Wow thats some impressive power they have over our government. 
 
Time to make your voice heard people - don't let this happen!!!
Scott MacQuarrie

Written by Frank on 2008-06-12 23:17:22
How does this legislation protect your photographs better than the current laws? It's currently illegal to use them without your permission. The same applies to your material on Facebook, etc.
DMCA

Written by Sean on 2008-06-12 23:49:27
Michael Geist, 
 
On behalf of all sane Canadians, I would like to thank-you for all of your efforts against this bill. You are our strongest activist and we are lucky to have someone like you. 
 
Regards.
Written by Sean SLaney on 2008-06-12 23:51:02
Unbelievable litany of misinformed, alarmist gibberish on here. I'm anti-Tory and pro-digital-world, but this bill is a reasonable balance between the interests of end users wanting to have reasonable freedom to back up and format-shift copyrighted works and the enduring right of creators and copyright owners to benefit from their work and make a living. This isn't about Disney and Sony and RIAA and the other U.S. bogeymen you all keep raising. There are 15,000 fulltime writers in Canada and 8000 songwriter/performers. Just because a copyright work in digital form CAN be hacked and shared doesn't mean it follows that it should be and laws must erase the rights of creators.  
 
When you buy a song or a digital AV production, you're buying it under a contract; you have the freedom not to buy it if you don't accept the terms, but you NEVER had the freedom to hack and copy. Michael Geist, you're ostensibly a credentialed academic, but you have spawned a legion of slacker theives who construct tissue-paper net-libertarian BS rationales. If you don't like TPMs and DRMs, don't do business with the seller, but how you ever got it in your lovable geek heads that a creator or copyright owner can't seek to prevent unauthorized uses is beyond me. When Sony made the ill-advised move to put malware on some of its CDs it was uncovered and the marketplace corrected for it (Sony got hammered). No content provider would be wise to use draconian TPMs going forward, but what you're advocating is like telling a hotel operator they can't put locks on the doors of their rooms to prevent unintended uses.
Bad shit

Written by Lerris on 2008-06-12 23:53:54
This is some seriously bad shit, who do I bury in mail to get Prentice fired?
*** 2 QUESTIONS ***

Written by Peter Lount on 2008-06-12 23:56:28
Question 1: 
 
If films and TV programs are subsidized using tax payer money in Canada, aren't Canadians who download these films partial owners of the copyrighted material? 
 
 
Question 2: 
 
The canadian government currently collects extra taxes for blank media (discs, tapes, etc...) to compensate for people copying music and films. If copying becomes illegal, how can they collect taxes from an illegal activity? 
 
 
If anyone knows these answers, I'd sure like to know.
Written by Paul on 2008-06-13 00:02:07
Sean 
So in the short time it has been released you have analyzed the Bill in detail and this is your considered opinion that the Bill is "a reasonable balance between the interests"?
Written by Mark on 2008-06-13 00:07:59
If private copying is legal, why is circumventing digital protections for the purpose of private copying illegal? Just because somebody _MIGHT_ break the law? Consider that it's legal to drive at 100kph on the freeway, but that's certainly not the case near a school zone or a city, where the limit is 30kph for the former and generally 50kph for the latter. Why do they then make cars that can go any faster than 50kph, when a person _MIGHT_ use their car to speed unsafely in urban areas, or worse, through school zones? The answer, of course, is because it is PERFECTLY LEGAL to go faster than that in other areas. Which brings us full circle... and that is that it is PERFECTLY LEGAL to copy for private use, so why make the distribution of tools that would allow a person to do that illegal? Who can I write a letter to that has a hope in hell of hearing any sense in this matter?
Don't drink the kool-aid!

Written by John Again on 2008-06-13 00:22:25
Be sure to email Jim Prentice. Tell him and your local M.P. that we are not going to drink the Canadian DMCA kool-aid!  
 
Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca
Some Questions

Written by MarkM on 2008-06-13 00:24:30
Some questions: 
 
What happens at the time of copyright expiry for works locked up in a Digital Rights Management system?  
 
What if the copyright owners don't want to unencrypt the works that are locked up in their DRM system?  
 
With the proposed law, is DRM a complete end-run around copyright that lets the owners keep the works locked up forever?  
 
What if they (or the DRM "keys") are in another country? Can Canada even force them to release the works on the copyright expiry date? 
 
Are we allowed to decrypt them on our own after expiry? Will the tools even be legal to attempt it? 
 
Our democracy is based on individual rights. Does this legislation enhance or diminish them?  
Acta Treaty

Written by RJ on 2008-06-13 00:26:15
I wonder if this is the slight of hand to make the rather draconian sounding secret ACTA treaty, being negotiated by the Harper government, seem more balanced and reasonable by comparison. It is a known negotiation technique to make outrageous initial demands and then negotiate down to what you really desire. The act of making concessions makes you look reasonable and rational even when the final results would be outrageous if they were to be made on there own. I suspect a hustle. 
 
RJ
So short-sighted

Written by on 2008-06-13 00:45:40
The entertainment industry is skating on thin ice here. I wonder if they realize the damage they are going to be doing to themselves if this goes through. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Sure the old politicians won't understand the extent of this law, I'd be surprised if any of em even knew what an iPod is. But neither are they the ones feeding the mega-bucks into the entertainment industry. If this goes through they'll alienate such a large portion of their consumer base. If you think the industry is bleeding money now due to pirating, after this goes through they'll be begging us to pirate. I like many others have purchased (legally) hundreds of CD's, and have tons of DVD's. I guarantee you that I will not purchase another, its only movies and music. I'm not going to re-purchase media 80 times over because I want to play it on different devices, I just won't purchase it, simple as that. Its only entertainment, I can go without. No good will come of this, not to consumers, but not to providers either.
Written by Dean on 2008-06-13 01:03:58
"Unbelievable litany of misinformed, alarmist gibberish on here. I'm anti-Tory and pro-digital-world, but this bill is a reasonable balance between the interests of end users wanting to have reasonable freedom to back up and format-shift copyrighted works and the enduring right of creators and copyright owners to benefit from their work and make a living. This isn't about Disney and Sony and RIAA and the other U.S. bogeymen you all keep raising. There are 15,000 fulltime writers in Canada and 8000 songwriter/performers. Just because a copyright work in digital form CAN be hacked and shared doesn't mean it follows that it should be and laws must erase the rights of creators." 
 
------ 
Well Sean, people are freaking out not because of the sharing aspect -- go read the discussion AGAIN before spouting off on a tangent. 
------ 
 
 
"When you buy a song or a digital AV production, you're buying it under a contract; you have the freedom not to buy it if you don't accept the terms, but you NEVER had the freedom to hack and copy." 
 
------ 
Ah, here's where the problem lies. I buy a DRMd DVD movie. I have a set-top box and want it put on my harddrive - bzzzzt!!!! Can't be done! It can, if it is not DRMd, but because everything is, I am suddenly breaking the law. I am a large content collector, but I certainly don't intent to pay for something twice; this bill, in fact, ENCOURAGES me to download that movie online -- the penalties for doing so are far less draconian; in fact, if I'm not sharing content myself, the penalties remain practically non-existent.  
 
So, let's recap: if I buy a CD and it is DRMd, I MUST buy a separate song for the IPOD. If I rip the copy protected CD so that I can copy the songs on the IPOD, I'm liable for up to $20,000. But if I download that album without sharing something myself - that's more or less okay. 
 
Now, if you are so blinded to find that reasonable, then fine. 
------ 
 
" Michael Geist, you're ostensibly a credentialed academic, but you have spawned a legion of slacker theives who construct ti€ssue-paper net-libertarian BS rationales. If you don't like TPMs and DRMs, don't do business with the seller, but how you ever got it in your lovable geek heads that a creator or copyright owner can't seek to prevent unauthorized uses is beyond me. When Sony made the ill-advised move to put malware on some of its CDs it was uncovered and the marketplace corrected for it (Sony got hammered). No content provider would be wise to use draconian TPMs going forward, but what you're advocating is like telling a hotel operator they can't put locks on the doors of their rooms to prevent unintended uses." 
 
------ 
Once again, you've missed the point, entirely.  
------
Questions about model

Written by Stephan Wehner on 2008-06-13 01:11:41
I think it's pretty difficult to develop laws. With this one, I don't think they got close to the issue they are trying to solve. 
 
Quoting C-61: 
Section 29.21 It is not an infringement of copyright for an individual to reproduce a work ...... 
End Quote. 
 
All right, what if individual is an employee, member of some organization, etc. Are corporations excluded / included or what (they might say "we needed backups") 
 
Quoting C-61. 
Section 29.21 1 (i) reproduces the work or other subject-matter no more than once for each device that the individual owns. 
End Quote. 
 
I guess counting to one might seem easy enough.  
 
* There are online-backup services available. Not covered.  
* Person might not own any CD-writer (just borrowed), but owns some CD's. Doesn't look covered. 
* Person keeps several backups on the same device, "Time Machine" 
 
So these two tiny little quotes give me the impression: 
 
* A frantic attempt to cover some "abuses", which are imagined to play out with a very simple setting: one author, one person, one PC, one CD, one Internet connection. 
 
* Unable to grasp the wide array of possibilities of how technology is used. 
 
Please let me know if I'm on the wrong track with any of this. 
 
See you 
 
Stephan
Free Speech

Written by Pareto on 2008-06-13 01:12:53
I know many people here are familiar with Wikipedia, and the program GNU/Linux and Firefox, which are all works which are copylefted under a license created by Richard Stallman). Stallman created the copyleft license called GNU General Public License, since he had foreseen the end outcome of what a creeping of copyright laws will do. A story by Richard Stallman (RMS) on this issue is set in a future where copyright laws are absolute, and people are forced to pay to read materials, by the word:  
 
The Right to Read - by Richard Stallman 
[ link ]
It will never fly

Written by Christopher on 2008-06-13 01:34:24
This country can't even provide adequate courts and policing for normal crimes, let alone for every citizen nation-wide to enforce copyright provisions.  
 
We should see strong interest in I2P and TOR in the near future. 
 
I2P info can be found here: [ link ]
Down With Jim & Stephen!

Written by Adam on 2008-06-13 01:39:33
I was going to go ahead and point out holes, flaws and the logical fallacies of this bill (if you can call it that), instead I'm choosing to rant about the idiocy of Jim Prentice and the PM.  
 
Just when you think that politicians have their heads screwed on straight they go and do something unilaterally self destructive. I know you can't please everyone but I find it hard to believe that the only people the conservatives seem eager to please are Neanderthal business practices.
Written by Rob on 2008-06-13 01:41:33
I'm a Prentice constituent. I wrote him an email back during the original kurfuffle. Today I got a form email back, how wonderful it all was, comprehensive talking points and everything. But nothing to do with what I had emailed him in the past. 
 
Part of my reply was to ask him to remember the NEP and the National Policy (rail tariffs) and how the West generally and Alberta particularly has always gotten most exceptionally screwed by outside interests intent on milking our money? Is he happy with the same thing happening to Canada generally, being milked (sorry, Xtremely monetized) instead of poor little old Alberta? Wasn't the whole idea of us Westerners electing Conservatives was that would end? 
 
But nobody gives a damn about what a Calgarian thinks, we are all supposed to be eternally safe seats, no matter how much Mr. Prentice, my MP, screws id over, we'll keep on not voting in droves.
Expect nothing less from the Hypocrite

Written by gps on 2008-06-13 01:47:10
The problem isn\'t the effort towards protecting the intellectual property of the people who create it, for what people have creatively created as both a means of self-support and to further our state of culture, science, and experience should be protected...that effort is a good and decent cause that should be enforced, no matter what the smug, self-righteous \'borrower thieves\' use to justify their crimes. Some do it for love, but most do it for the $$$ and practically none of them would do it for free. Like it or not, this has let you live longer, healthier lives, saturated your world with entertainment, and greatly enhanced your quality of living. 
 
If copyright isn\'t at least reasonably enforced, we will reach a point where people will find better, more profitable things to do with their time than create new intellectual property for other people to steal. Leave things like new drugs, music, or software unprotected and history has shown that it will be abused not only by the people who will take it and return nothing, but also by other more capitalistic types who will use it to further their own agendas (through litigation, repackaging, etc.). Of course there are cases where it has worked out well (RadioHead) but there are many more cases where it has not (look at all the litigation in the UNIX world between the little engines that could and big rich corporations and the near-absent returns most people who use FOSS software give back to that community). 
 
The problem is two-fold, and on both sides of the fence. On one side you have people of the same sort of intellectual bent that ran the Spanish Inquisition for 450 years, fumbling bureaucrats with little regard for the \'spirit\' of the law and governed more by lazy indifference, undisguised greed or basic incompetence. On the other side you have people who will take whatever they can get away with, give little or nothing back, and then dare you to call them a thief while they prune the \'truth\' to suit their own interests. 
 
Obviously the only way for copyright to work is to have level-headed, honest and forward-looking people both create and moderate reasonable laws to protect the content, and for consumers to respect the right of the creator and their agents to profit from their efforts and realize that they don\'t have the right to self-dictate the terms of their purchase. 
 
Just as obvious is the fact that this isn\'t going to happen any time soon. This bill goes way too far, is absurdly unenforceable, and so caters to the industry that forced its creation that literally makes me ill to think that Prentice considers himself a decent human being. On the other hand, a very large number of the posters above are just as willing to pretend they are justified in stealing what they haven\'t paid for (\'Quick, everyone download LimeWire and Morpheaus and get ALL the FREE music you can get before its too late!\' is at least an honest admission of where many of the above poster\'s concerns really lie). 
 
By the way, if you want a simple example of how clueless the man is who forward this bill is, take a look at his own copyright infringement at [ link ]; last time I checked, Google\'s terms and conditions specifically forbid using imagery from their maps outside of their technology, not to mention cropping out both their name and the map\'s copyright label. Perhaps he should be the first victim of his own bill, eh?
Jim Prentice

Written by Adam on 2008-06-13 01:50:48
Let Jim know just how you feel about his drivel. 
 
Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca
Illegal source code

Written by Jardine on 2008-06-13 01:55:50
The code got cut off. Here's a link to a bunch of different implementations of DeCSS 
 
[ link ]
I always though

Written by Johan on 2008-06-13 02:02:52
I always thought, that the government would have better things to do with their time and THE TAX payers money.. 
 
I always thought when I pay tax to the government and they TAKE SO MUCH MONEY FROM MY PAYCHECKS that the money would go to people that need it, like homeless, OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, fire department, create a life for the better. BUT I DIDN'T think for one minute that my tax dollars would go HELP the MUSIC and MOVIE industry become richer, and MR. Jim would get more money in his pocket. 
 
 
People are getting killed right left and centre , we have OUR ARMY using outdated equipment, we have our SOILDERS fighting wars etc, IN GENERAL we have so many ISSUES, AND MAINLY OUR HEALTH CARE that they chose to USE OUR tax dollars to HELP THE music and movie industry fight their fight. 
 
I DONT WANT our TAX money to go To BORDER COPS, and Security people at airports to CHECK CELL PHONES. MP3 players, etc etc so they can HELP JIMMY get some money. 
 
I want the border cops, and security workers to protect US from terrorist, etc etc, I could care less what music they have on their mp3 player or cell phone, OR what tune rings when they get a phone call 
 
Our government is becoming a bunch of .. well u guys can fill the gaps. 
 
 
Why do we vote when the government doesn't respresent the people , it represents the businesses. 
f'ing stupid. 
Written by on 2008-06-13 02:07:05
try and catch me.... BIATCH!
Written by mike on 2008-06-13 02:17:52
i had to stop reading the new DMCA rules because my new weezer cd has fiished downloading...
Written by Mark on 2008-06-13 02:20:36
Not only is this not particularly enforceable... that is, the people who do the most damage to the media industries through piracy *WILL* acquire the tools to circumvent copy protection and *WILL* continue infringe on copyright irrespective of the laws that supposedly prohibit it, but these same laws will prohibit circumvention of copy protection even when no real copy infringement is actually intended (ie, personal use, fair dealings, etc... both of which were supposedly exempt from infringement) prevent otherwise decent and normal people who were simply interested in creating a back-up of their digital library from doing so. While it's true that if you allow circumvention for personal use copies, an actual pirate would appear to likewise have easy access to such tools, in fact laws trying prohibit them won't actually stop or even slow down the real pirates one jot. In fact, the *ONLY* thing that would be affected by this law is casual copying, and that would preclude pretty much all personal use copying unless one resorts to using the same underground technology avenues that the pirates will go to. Why put legit users in a position where they must use tools that are outlawed in order to do something legal? 
 
This isn't, as another poster mentioned above, comparable to a matter of objecting to hotel owners from putting locks on their doors so that their rooms can't be utilized for unintended use, it's more like not even allowing legitimate patrons to have keys to their own rooms... instead every patron must be escorted to their room by a hotel employee who will let them in. Where or not one might theoretically have a more secure premises that way, in the end all you'll have is a hotel that grossly inconveniences its own patrons.
Written by Corp on 2008-06-13 02:27:58
Ignorant bill. Should never pass(I hope). They will write another draft for sure.
Yarrrrrrraauuuugggggg1!111one

Written by Canadian Robin Hood on 2008-06-13 02:58:12
Well, that about does it... I said the day would come when they would try to threaten my mad downloading ways. 160 gig a month! You think they won't find me first? So now I have to start building my own internet; one free of moneygrubbing companies, so that the rest of this "democractic" circus can't pass laws restricting or monitoring our free communication.  
 
You can join, but you'd have to verify and adhere to some open standards that recognize you as a free contributor. Then we use super WiMax or Wireless something to branch out and connect, enabling a web of free communication for the whole world to use. You can roam with your account, and borrow and lend access from your phone, or computer etc. Your sharing ratio, or Karma(TM), could represent your contributions to the network in a variety of ways. 
 
Just relax Sheeple. They can't stop the Rock.
YUP

Written by steph on 2008-06-13 03:27:18
If the law passes, you could find "NO" and "YES" items:  
 
-NO Items: 
* NO blank DVD OR CD (NO copy, you will Never breaking the law)  
* NO Internet(Network)Games (Unless you are authorized users/owners from copyrighted products.)  
* NO friends(Because you are not allowed to share any fun with your friends, you have to watch DVD movies you bought, and use DVD machine you bought, and watch it by yourself in your own home, otherwise you break the copyright law.) 
* NO Internet (You could break the law any time because when you click, you could listen and watch copyrighted media products you are not supposed to listen and see because you did not pay for that, so you are already become a criminal. Without Internet, you will never be ticketed by $500.)  
* N0 RESEARCH PAPER (The improper use will make you become criminal even you make citations. You are not allowed to buy electronical copy of the book from school, because the library only keeps it for five days. You have to finish your final paper within one week whatever it is realistic or not.  
 
"YES" ITEMS:  
 
* WATCH FREE PUBLIC TV at home. (No copy right law will restrict you.) 
 
Conclusion:  
 
Let us back to ten or twenty years ago, the technology should be dating back to the old times.  
The high speed internet service should go back to Dial-up service.  
We only need to check the news.  
 
 
 
Arg!

Written by Matt on 2008-06-13 03:27:53
I too am a Prentice constituent, even joined the mob and swamped his Xmas party; I wasn't happy then and am even madder now. And, yeah, I voted... for the other guy.
all the small things

Written by genesis14 on 2008-06-13 03:36:17
Well the way I see it is the fact that "possessing" software OR hardware which circumvents drm encryption is illegal. What is the basic DVD player doing while you watch it on your televison? Is it not deciphering CSS encryption? So while you may not be copying the video onto anything, the hardware portion (the player itself), is still breaking DRM is it not? or the Set top boxes (digital cable or sat. boxes) that cable companies supply you ... They are feeding encrypted signals into your house and the digital box that you watch tv on in deciphering the code which refered by the bill ... is illegal. All these small things that people take for granted and get accustomed to are easily forgotten but the fact still remains that these things are hardware in which circumvents DRM encryption wheather you copy them or not. Pictures on the internet ... Copyrighted. So how can you say that they are for fair use when you cant use them for advertisements ... even though you paid for them?
What Can I Do?

Written by Gerry W. on 2008-06-13 03:49:28
If I'm dissatisfied with this decision, what can I do with my money for the next while? I can decide NOT to go see a new movie in an expensive cinema. I can decide NOT to buy any DVD movies or music CDs at the store or online. I can decide NOT to rent or buy any video games. I can cancel my ISP account, and pick up my email at an internet cafe or the public library. 
 
These things I can do on my own. Now, if all of us decided to do this for the summer a message might get through. Boy oh boycott.
Written by Zeeman on 2008-06-13 06:29:20
Tim Meehan - yes your right about the IP but without the physical file whats to prove someone didnt jump on your wifi network. They always want the hardrive - I think they need it to prove the physical file is actually there on the drive. I would think - no file on drive, no case. 
Or have the thought-police finally arrived?
Unfair secretive laws

Written by Jon Gallant on 2008-06-13 08:00:49
I am very angered by this. How can Jim Prentice, a retarded scapegoat for Industry Canada, change the face of the internet without the consent of the Canadians? Why would any Canadian vote YES on this bill?  
 
We are no longer living in a democracy. Laws are pushed by one single person, in this case, a retarded scapegoat. 
 
I assure you that if you ask every single Canadian if they approve of this law, it will definitely be a minority. But I guess Canadians are used to bending over backwards for minorities. 
 
Listening to Music in a Group

Written by Jonesy on 2008-06-13 08:22:00
So wait a sec... If I buy a CD and put it on at a party for a group of people to listen too... Am I now "sharing" and subject to a fine?
Well there go our rights

Written by Nathan on 2008-06-13 08:26:19
out the bloody window...from what I've read so far...this is not about copyright any more...its about establishing an electronic dictatorship over Canadians and what they are allowed to do with the content that the have purchased. I guess I will not be buying any more DVDs or CDs anymore simply because I am not guaranteed not to be sued by the government or their usa bed fellows that helped push this bill because I used my purchases in a way that this bill deems criminal.
Also I have to wonder..

Written by Nathan on 2008-06-13 08:29:21
exactly how much money the conservative government was promised by the us interests in seeing this bill made, and don't anyone tell me that this is not what happened, some group offered the Canadian government a substantial sum of cash to get this bill through, otherwise the government would not have batted an eye at it and cared.
DRM trumps copyright law

Written by Matt Schneider on 2008-06-13 09:24:33
Hey Mark: "What happens at the time of copyright expiry for works locked up in a Digital Rights Management system?" 
 
DRM trumps all. Read Lawrence Lessig's book _Free Culture_. If you buy an ebook that is well in the public domain (perhaps a Jane Austen book), and it has DRM on it, it's illegal for you to do anything with it that the content provider doesn't want you to do with it. Any attempt to circumvent the DRM--even if it is only to access your rights to the text as a public domain document--would be illegal and would result either in a fine or jail time. With this in mind, you can probably guess the answers to your other questions. There is no such thing as Fair Dealing rights or Public Domain in a country with anti-circumvention legislation.
Sheila Fraser

Written by realyst on 2008-06-13 09:25:40
I wonder if the Auditor General can be encouraged to look at the lobbying that must have occurred for this horror to have been born.
Time for Change....

Written by Sean on 2008-06-13 09:36:46
A federal election is comming soon... time for change...
The Canadian DMCA and Malware

Written by A Canadian Telco Security Geek on 2008-06-13 09:45:14
I'll have more to say about this clumsily transparent, corrupt attempt to import entertainment industry-dictated, American laws into Canada later, but for now, I'll confine my comments to one thing that I don't think anybody else has noticed: 
 
As far as I have been able to interpret it, the Canadian DMCA seems to contain a blanket prohibition, with only very narrow exemptions (for blind people, etc.), against "circumvention of Technological Protection Mechanisms" (e.g. so-called "Digital Rights Management" systems). This Draconian prohibition has a cornucopia of disastrously negative side-effects -- for example it basically means that content industries are to be "trusted" not to abuse DRM technology so as to eliminate fair use rights that the Canadian DMCA explicitly endows Canadian consumers with, in other parts of the legislation -- but when you consider its possible side-effects in the context of unwanted computer software, Canadian computer users could be in for a very unpleasant experience. 
 
The Canadian DMCA apparently has a (very) limited exemption regarding circumvention of TPMs, for the express purpose of "security research", but it is pretty clear from the (sic.) "fact sheets" on the Government of Canada Website that the intent of this escape clause is limited to the small subset of computer users who do security research professionally. It does NOT appear to apply to either ordinary Canadian consumers, or to security companies who manufacture security software to assist ordinary consumers. 
 
-- SO -- 
 
(1.) If I get a virus, that uses some form of TPM (say, encrypting itself, hiding in the Registry, etc.) to prevent me from removing it with (say) Symantec Anti-Virus, would doing that be prohibited under Bill C-61? You could make an argument either way, but in practice, it's unlikely that you'd get sued by the virus manufacturer. 
 
(2.) But what if I have something like the infamous Sony rootkit; that is, a TPM that was clearly installed on my computer as a DRM mechanism, but which is so badly designed that it opens up a bunch of other, easily exploitable security holes on my PC? Under the Canadian DMCA, it seems very clear that trying to "circumvent" the Sony rootkit, even if I am doing it to keep my computer safe from the vulnerabilities that the rootkit imposed upon me, constitutes a crime for which I can be sued by Sony in this case. 
 
In other words, Bill C-61 completely escapes software manufacturers and media companies from any responsibility or duty of care, in the way in which they implement a DRM system or TPM. The minute that one of these technologies somehow shows up on your PC, you are legally prohibited from removing it, no matter how serious the side-effects might be. 
 
(3.) Related to (2.) above -- and this is something that has already been seen happening in some kinds of poorly (or maliciously) crafted DRM systems -- what if a software application that gets on my PC, and whose functionality (whatever that might be) is either protected by, or is intended to enforce, TPM or DRM functions, disables some other, essential part of my computer system? 
 
Two good examples of this, which, again, there is already a track record for, is software that stops you from using your CD or DVD writer to burn CDs / DVDs (or to burn certain kinds of content, for example .mp3s or MPEG video files), and the infamous Microsoft Windows Vista HDMI DRM systems that cripple the video resolution output of your monitor or TV if it "thinks" (frequently, incorrectly, this happens a lot due to device driver problems) that some part of your computer infrastructure isn't "enforcing copy protection"? 
 
It seems pretty clear to me that the Canadian DMCA's anti-circumvention restrictions contain no exemption at all for attempts to evade or remove TPMs / DRM systems, just so you can restore your computer to the functionality that it had before the systems somehow (voluntarily or otherwise) showed up on your computer. And they place no burden at all on manufacturers to avoid this happening. (Indeed, the mere act of trying to disable the DRM system so you can find out what part of your computer isn't working, itself seems to be a violation of Bill C-61. Say "goodbye" to troubleshooting, PC users!) 
 
(4.) Now the last situation is, in my opinion, the most interesting one of all. The Canadian DMCA seems to assume that there is a clear dividing line between "malware" and "legitimate software that uses TPMs to protect content holder rights". There is no such thing, which leads to perverse consequences under Bill C-61. 
 
Consider, for example, the many forms of "adware", "browser toolbars", etc. (a week ago, when I downloaded and installed the latest version of Acrobat Reader, there was a very easy-to-miss, pre-checked "option" to install the Yahoo Toolbar, which is a perfect example of how sneakily these things get installed on your PC; many of them, of course, come pre-loaded on new PCs). These types of software are very frequently installed on computers without the user's informed knowledge or consent and -- this is the crucial point -- unlike malware, they are usually manufactured and (remotely) operated by real commercial companies that claim at least a patina of legitimacy. 
 
Now, the question is, if -- and this is already the case with many instances of this semi-malware -- an adware program uses a TPM or DRM system to make it difficult to remove from your PC (or even to hide its presence), is it illegal under Bill C-61 to remove it, or to distribute tools to remove it? My reading of the legislation says "yes, it's illegal", because the Bill's anti-circumvention section seems to have no escape clause of "necessity". 
 
Conclusion: Symantec, McAfee and even Microsoft, will now have to prohibit their anti-virus programs from (a) identifying adware on your system and (b) removing it, if an adware manufacturer implements any form of TPM (ranging from program obfuscation to auto-reinstallation) intended to stop you from removing it yourself. (Remember, the anti-virus companies could theoretically be sued by adware makers on a per-copy basis, so, for example, if Symantec had a user base of 100,000 Canadian users, and it pushed out an update to its AV program that disabled the TPM for an adware maker to all of these, it could be sued for $500 x 100,000, times the number of adware programs that the patch tried to remove or disable. It would be far safer for the AV software maker to just let the adware stay on your system, rather than risk such a large financial penalty.) 
 
It is obvious to me that Minister Prentice and Minister Verner are completely ignorant of the above consequences of Bill C-61, as they are of all the other negative effects of this badly crafted piece of legislation, because of course the bill is meant to support the interests of American content producers, not Canadian citizens. 
 
All Canadians should immediately write their Member of Parliament and demand that a vote of confidence be called on Bill C-61, and that the Conservative government should be defeated on this motion of confidence, triggering a Canadian general election in which Prime Minister Harper and Minister Prentice should have to defend the details of Bill C-61 to the same public that they are trying to steal long-held fair use rights, from. 
 
A Canadian Telco Security Geek  
 
Fight!

Written by Ben Green on 2008-06-13 09:53:46
Wow, just wow. I hope to God it does not pass, but if it does I will do the following: 
 
1. Download all the media I can before it passes 
2. Cancel Cable and downgrade internet for just browsing/email purposes 
3. Boycott all DVD/CDs. I have put too much coin into their purses already, I don\'t need to be treated as a criminal for legally purchased media. 
 
I have contacted my MP and written Prentice regarding how much he has failed Canadians. I have told everyone I know to do the same. I have joined many groups and notified all opposition parties. We must do everything in our power to keep this from ever becoming law. There are so many problems with this I don\'t know where to begin. Made in Canada my ass.
I Cannot Backup Anymore

Written by Rocco Rumpapalli on 2008-06-13 10:02:22
So I guess all these people - companies who have backup systems for fire or disaster will soon become illegal too - great everyone start phoning the Software Alliance !!! 
 
Here is soom good info 
The results of a recent nationwide survey released by the Business Software Alliance (BSA) show that illegal downloading of digital copyrighted works by youth (ages 8 to 18) has dropped by 24 percent in the last three years. The survey, first conducted in 2004, indicated that 60 percent of survey participants reported downloading software, music, movies, or games without paying for it; in 2006 the percentage of those who downloaded without paying dropped to 43 percent; and in 2007 the percentage decreased to 36 percent. Youth report that parental oversight is a significant motivator and key influencing factor in their online behavior. 
 
[ link ]
Viktor

Written by on 2008-06-13 10:09:01
One thing no one seems to have mentioned. 
Don't we already pay the music industry a "tax" on every dvd/cd -r we purchase in Canada, 
whether we store pirated or legal material on it? 
They are also trying to lobby to get the same kind of tax on our internet connections. 
Where does than fit in with the new bill? 
Will this bill make that/those taxes go away? 
 
They are getting out of hand. I have already been boycotting this industry for many years. 
I watch less than 1 hour of tv on my tv set/month. I haven't purchased any music or downloaded any for over a year. 
I can certainly live without the MaFIIA. But don't illegalize my listening to van halen on my ipod. I paid for those cds. 
Instead of watching the tube, I can hang out with my friends, or gf. I'm proud not to support such a corrupt industry. 
PS I buy those dvd-rs in the USA :D
Copyright

Written by Scott MacQuarrie on 2008-06-13 10:33:50
Hi Frank, 
 
It protect my copyright in several ways: 
 
First, and most importantly, it now defines the copyright of a photographer as belonging to the photographer by default. Until now, I have had to prove I had a contract with a specific clause giving me copyright, just to keep what is mine. 
 
Second, a client cannot use my work on their website or in any other media without my permission. It's a huge problem where clients take photographic work intended for print and put it up on their website without permission. This also applies when magazines re-release articles (and photographs) in other forms. The writer's strike in the US was specifically about this issue. 
 
Third, it defines penalties individual infringement. It's also a huge problem where people steal (yes, steal) photographs for use on their websites without permission. I usually have no problem with this usage and usually grant permission, but I want to be at least asked before my work gets used somewhere. If this is a larger website that makes money, I want to be paid.  
 
As for music and DVDs, there is nothing stopping you from ripping a DVD or CD you purchased for use on a different player. This is called fair use. However, you will now get in trouble if you upload this work somewhere or download it without permission. This is not a bad thing - when you download music without paying for it you are stealing from the artist who made it, nit the corporation selling the CD. The artist loses royalty payments and real money, while the corporation just considers it viral marketing.  
 
It is damn hard to make a living as an artist in this country. This overdue change to the Canadian copyright laws will protect the incomes of individual artists. 
 
We're Screwed…!

Written by Comics Guy on 2008-06-13 10:49:18
What saddens me most is that C-61 is going to pass without problems. If you don\'t believe me, look at C-10: the ENTIRE film community was vocally against giving censorship powers against film and television production in this country and Mr. Dion didn\'t utter a peep against it. =(  
 
If anything, you should be writing Mr. Dion, Mr. Duceppe and Mr. Layton and BEGGING them to topple the government about this bill. Because the realities of this situation are just sickening. 
 
Weezer rushed their new album to stores because it leaked to the Internet. Same with Coldplay. And Beck is, apparently, not letting the master of his new album out of his sight. These albums aren\'t being leaked by the fans — they\'re being done WITHIN THE INDUSTRY ITSELF! 
 
Movies are worse: Internet copies of Oscar contenders marked \"For your consideration\" mean that they come from members of the Academy, Hollywood\'s elite club. It\'s a bad case of denial. Can you imagine what would happen if the FBI identified Dakota Fanning or Shia LeBouf as Internet pirates? 
 
How many American artists were compensated by the RIAA/MPAA/FBI lawsuits in the US? Wasn\'t that what made our blank media tax so uniquely Canadian — that it helped our artists without harming our citizens? 
 
And when the biggest fish they could fry in court got nailed for 15 songs — 15!!! — isn\'t that comparison with the same industry\'s projections on piracy PROOF that high fines don\'t discourage piracy in the slightest?  
 
The MPAA was recently asked to prove its \"statistics\" and they couldn\'t; they ADMITTED they were making all the numbers up — including the Canadian piracy percentage. Yet, these are the stats that the government is using to defend its actions. Legislation like this may make Canada look good in the international copyright community, but it\'s extremely punitive to Canadians in the process.
photographs

Written by brian on 2008-06-13 10:50:53
Scott: In Canada, photographs are copyright from the date they are taken plus 50 years. If you state that they are copyright on your web page (or on Flickr), then they are copyright. I can't see how this law can make then any more copyright than they already are.
Re: photographs

Written by Photoguy on 2008-06-13 11:43:05
Brian, 
Up until now, if someone commissioned Scott to do photos they were automatically the copyright holders unless he could negotiate otherwise in a contract. This was only the case for photographs. For example, CBC commissioned Delores Claman to write the HNIC theme song and as we all know now from the news, she's still the copyright holder.
I hope this bill dies on the table...

Written by Adam Snider on 2008-06-13 11:49:26
I sincerely hope that this bill dies on the table. It's far worse and far more draconian than I could have ever imagined. I truly hope that our opposition parties do their job and kill this legislation, or that the Senate will have the balls to send it back to the House for revision if it does make it through Parliament.
@Telco Geek

Written by Andrew on 2008-06-13 11:53:28
You may have missed it earlier in this posting - but I wrote out the exception section. 
 
There are specific provisions to removing DRM if it is collecting third-party information without your consent. So spyware/adware/rootkits would be able to be removed. 
 
I might be missing some other things in here - and it'd actually be nice I think to have someone do a side-by-side analysis of the Canadian and US DMCA's just to see the differences and similarities between them just to see how bad this is. 
 
I'm not happy with the bill - but I think that there might be some hyperbole being thrown into the mix as to exactly how bad it is, and before I write my MP I want to make sure I have very specific sections and implications that I can write to him about to show where it's wrong without going to a slippery slope fallacy.
Priorities

Written by Kathy on 2008-06-13 12:03:29
Has anybody in parliament ever thought why people pirate music? Does it make since to anyone that a doctor might make less than $300,000 per year for saving people's lives while Britney Spears makes $700,000 each day before she even gets out of bed? Why should our law enforcing funds be spent on making sure that people with too much money get more money? While our cop is busting someone for copying their $20.00 CD to other devices, somebody's teenager is being shot by a madman!!! I hope that our cops have more sense of priorities than the government does when enforcing this bill.
Fight!

Written by Second L on 2008-06-13 13:30:17
We shall stand up and fight the injustice. 
There's no way we let this slide. 
 
This is like Scientology, it's terrible.
C-61 and Adware

Written by A Canadian Telco Security Geek on 2008-06-13 13:51:07
Andrew -- 
 
I had read these sections (regarding spyware).  
 
However, the point is, with most forms of adware (examples: "HotBar", "BonziBuddy", etc.), these types of malware use sneaky mechanisms -- typically, incomprehensible EULAs and so on -- that would very definitely give them a claim in court that they DID have your "consent" to spy on you. (After all, you clicked on the "OK" button, didn't you? That means you "consented" to everything and anything that they want to do, right?) 
 
Note that most EULAs, including those provided by "mainstream" organizations like Sony, Amazon, PayPal, etc., also have a clause saying that they can change the terms of their relationship with you at their discretion, and their only responsibility in so doing is to post a revised copy of the EULA on their Website, whether or not you ever read the "new" version that takes away whatever few protections you may have had under the "old" version.) 
 
Thus, under the Canadian DMCA, your attempt to reverse-engineer either the adware / malware program itself, or, equally, to try to reverse-engineer its communications over TCP back to wherever it is sending its information and getting its latest command and control instructions, is a prima facie violation of the anti-circumvention restrictions of Bill C-61, because you "consented" to impose whatever type of spying that the adware program disclosed under its EULA; legally, this is no different than the "consent" you gave iTunes, etc., to the DRM that they impose, under their own EULAs. 
 
And, even if none of the above were to be true, the Canadian DMCA would STILL prohibit you from bypassing TPMs such as the case I described, in which a "music player" that you install on your PC from a dual-session audio CD (remember, this happens automatically via Autorun, on some CDs), has the cute little side-effect of preventing you from ever burning .mp3s to CDs or DVDs, again. 
 
Any disclosure, however fleeting or obscured, by the "music player" software manufacturer, that the application was going to (here's the typical verbiage: "restrict your ability to play or copy certain types of digital media") so cripple your PC, would mean, under Bill C-61, that any attempt by you to later circumvent that artificially imposed loss of functionality, would make you criminally liable. 
 
Just THINK of the possibilities that this sort of thing opens up for the recording industry. They could, for example, demand a "kill bit" be installed in each and every DVR sold, so that upon detection of a recorded DVD that the the industry _thinks_ is "pirated", it immediately burns a hole through the "offending" disc, rendering it permanently useless. Any attempt by any Canadian to turn of this lovely little "feature", even if, say, to avoid having that copy of "Enchanted" that he or she just bought down at Blockbuster, ruined in this way, would make the consumer a criminal -- and communicating how to turn it off, over the Internet, would make everyone participating in the communication, a "criminal" as well. 
 
But of course, Conservatives like the idea of turning the country into a police state. If you don't like it, DON'T VOTE CONSERVATIVE. 
 
A Telco Security Geek
Written by Andrew on 2008-06-13 15:15:05
This is where I have an issue with the wordings of C-61. They grant and take away exceptions seemingly almost within the same sections. 
 
The exceptions that they grant do sound reasonable at the surface - and I\'m trying to find ways around the exceptions, but I\'m definitely not up on my legal mumbo-jumbo just understand the technical side of things better. 
 
I do hope that someone at some point does a side-by-side analysis of this proposed Act and the US\' DMCA just so that we can see how (dis?)similar they are - it would also help to understand the implications of the bill because we have real world examples to draw from for the DMCA.
Written by Andrew on 2008-06-13 15:20:05
Just to finish my thought - as I stated before, what I'm trying to do is understand the bill so that hopefully when I write my MP I'll be able to show a well-reasoned plea and not just a kneejerk reaction that will be met with a standard response. 
 
I'm probably being idealistic here but if show specifically how the rhetoric is misguided/mis-leading and cut off their arguments ahead of time if you want to make them actually think about what's on the bill - and perhaps actually consider revisions or going against the party line if they're PC, and help generate opposition if they're not.
Fuck GVMT

Written by Ajax on 2008-06-13 17:37:36
This babylonian tactic on the part of any government is so archaic as to the downfall of all civilization... The powers that be are all second citizens to Israel, and are part of an elitist group called the "WTO & UN"... 
This capitalistic world is communist from its base... 
 
Fascism to put it lightly encompasses every aspect of modern "democracy Read "The World Book Encyclopedia 1961" under fascism it describes our current world order and is a basic outline of the bush, Harper, blare, Campaign for a new world order... 
 
Quote: The Police State. Fascism depends upon the police (ie FBI CIA and other) to crush all opposition or decent. End quote: 
 
"Extreme Nationalism. Fascism is highly nationalistic. It tries to identify its principles with the country, so that disagreement will look like treason. Some other country, or group with in the country, is usually picked out to serve as "the enemy" and made to appear as the cause of all evils or misfortunes."  
 
The "Internet Pirates" Are the enemy of the WTO/UN Hierarchy Government... All European nations are a conglomerate bunch under the WTO/UN... MesoAmerica has recently joined also South Africa... China, Russia and Iran are the only one not part of the WTO/UN... 
Anybody this body of government does not like could alienate and cause to be called terrorists to the commonwealth...  
 
True patriotism is arguable as far as a society is concerned. A patriot is no more then a man/woman who wants change and is willing to go to the length of death to see that he/she does his/her part... He is then a terrorist to the country he wishes to change. 
 
This Zionists attitude that paints the picture of today's Democratic/Matriotic affairs are dictated and run by the Israeli forces through our own government Officers. 
 
Welcome to the new world Order... 
 
Making light of a situation and to base it on point.  
 
I build a counter at the Ritz I was only paid once for that counter but everybody and there dog uses it... Why am I not paid for every person that uses it. Music and software are no different. Except by "law" Fuck that... 
Ministerial Kickbacks

Written by CF on 2008-06-13 18:35:55
For those of you who have brought it up - there is no such thing as "fair use" in the sense that US copyright has it, and the fair dealing section of Canadian act is so narrow as to be useless. 
 
For those who point to various misdemeanors and minor felonies not being enforced take not - this is CIVIL law and federal level at that which means if you are sued by a corporation (not arrested) you will have to defend your position in court (there is no innocent till proven guilty in civil proceedings) and hope that the judge agrees with your evidence rather than the plaintiffs. It can also cost upwards of $50,000 to argue a case in federal court. 
 
This law serves no one except corporate stakeholders and those US and Canadian political hacks who would have democracy become autocracy (or at least more than it already is). 
 
As one posted has already suggested, I wonder what the climate is like in Rekyavik
You vote for the government you deserve

Written by Brother Anonymous on 2008-06-13 18:42:43
A lot of people tell me they didn't vote for this government, or approve of a lot of what they do. 
 
Still here we are with a seemingly draconian piece of legislation: 
 
-people aren't stomaching another election, if polls are to be believed 
-is this really a non-confidence-inducing bill? 
-is a purportedly digital police/nanny state what we really want? 
 
Maybe it will pass anyways and with the right situation and amount of money, eventually be stricken down on a Charter challenge. 
 
I guess writing my MP, getting my friends and colleagues and everyone else opposed to this is a better alternative. 
Ugh

Written by Metasto Del Velangie on 2008-06-13 23:01:01
The fact that you stupid people still beleave that you have a voice... 
 
Dumb retarded moronic saps 
I am 50 years in the making. I have watched everything change. You do not have a clue how fucked up this world is. Go ahead open your mouth in public in DC you will get arested because you have not purchased a protest licence... Ha Free my aching ass... dumb blind and stupid.
Written by Mark on 2008-06-14 04:27:13
On the subject of supposedly disabling autorun as a means of circumventing some DRM, one way that always works is to just reboot your system, immediately inserting the CD into the drive before Windows loads. 
 
Hmmm... I suppose the fact that I've just told people how to bypass autorun on a windows system without requiring even the slightest bit of technical skill or special knowledge would make me a criminal under this proposed act.
Music, TV & Movies P.1

Written by Jonathan on 2008-06-14 05:05:25
All forms of entertainment are being forced off the Internet! There is no reason for me having high-speed Internet anymore because I'll be breaking the law by downloading and/or sharing all forms of entertainment! The wave of the future is to not watch movies or TV shows when they first come right out at that exact moment! This is akin to the entertainment industry saying, if I use my VCR or a DVD recorder and tape an episode of Law & Order for instance and I then gave a VHS copy or DVD copy of that Law & Order show to a friend (free of charge--I'm not making any money on this and I'm not even charging for the VHS tape or the DVD), I would be breaking the law! 
 
But this isn't what bill c-61 wants, it wants to kill the future of how consumers use their entertainment in the 21st century! I belong to a torrent site where people upload shows (including me) and download TV shows already aired! Now this service was devised by consumers themselves because people who want to create their own private library of present and past TV shows couldn't get their needs filled by the market! The entertainment industry is extremely slow in putting out DVDs of past seasons of TV shows or even putting out DVDs of some popular shows at all! Many people who love TV, record their favorite shows, some have done this for many years long before the DVD system came out on the market. Now individuals are digitizing their old VHS libraries and are recording them on DVD. What torrent clubs do is they offer people to share their libraries with other users. This was the exact kind of spirit that brought together computer hobbyists 25 - 30 years ago who shared ideas and software. Then a killjoy named Bill Gates said, no--if you want to use my software, you'll have to pay for it--each and everyone of you! 
 
The same principle applies to music, not all music is so-called commercial top 40 hits being played on the radio. Websites like Demonoid.com make non-commercial music that you can't find anywhere (even if you wanted to pay for it--you can't find it) and makes it available for its members. Again this is a service that people have devised independent of the music industry because the market is unable to fill that void! So if I download an impossible to find song in MP3 format, I would be breaking the law! But if I then say to the music industry that you only put out a limited run on this record 20 years ago, you don't sell it anymore and only a few people in the world have this album. Why can't I get it if someone half-a-world a way is sharing it for free? You won't even allow me to buy legally so why am I a thief for getting a copy of your product for free from somebody who has it? You don't even care about your profits from this former artist, you don't sell this music anymore, so in this context why am I a criminal? 
 
Also with this law, this will bring the end to all MP3 players! Most people who use these devices to walk, run, exercise in the gym, ride on public transportation, etc. have not bought specific legal digitalized songs made just for these portable players! Most people have there own music or even have shared their music with other people where their source originated in formats other than a digitized format. Take me for example, I have many legal music cassettes that I bought years ago before CDs came on the market. For example, I have: The Who, Bruce Springsteen, SuperTramp, Chicago, The Beatles and I can go on and on. I am not going to buy this music again in digital format! I bought these tapes and I have converted them to wav format (and burned them as CDs) and I have also converted these wav files to MP3 format in order to play on my MP3 player. If this bill passes into law, I'm a thief; I misused my own music! Plus with some of CDs I bought years before MP3 players were even on the market, I used CD ripper software in order to digitize my and I repeat my CDs (they don't belong to the entertainment industry after I bought the CDs) in order to put that music on my MP3 player! The music industry would have me spend more money in order to buy those exact same songs in a digital format!
Music, TV & Movies P.2

Written by Jonathan on 2008-06-14 05:11:57
The entertainment industry's focus is so narrow! The entertainment industry is trying to shutdown all the things I'm doing, it isn't offering any reasonable market services and it just wants the customer to purchase its product piecemeal, just like Bill Gates did back in the early days of computer software! This logic is so backwards, I don't even know where to begin to tell the government that if this bill passes into law, all the possible future innovations that are being experimented by the average consumer of entertainment products will never see the light of day to turn into practical market applications. All this creativity rather than being embraced by the entertainment industry is being seen as a threat and they want to shut it all down! This is so backwards, it's like the horse and buggy industry seeing the beginnings of the turn-of-the-century car enthusiasts as a threat to their existence. Rather than embrace the new technology and start working on manufacturing car interiors and seats, the buggy industry is lobbying the government to pass a law to prevent the car from being further produced for the market! 
 
And that's exactly how the entertainment industry sees today's Internet enthusiasts, we're a threat because of how we are recreating new ways and methods in the way we consume of our entertainment media. Rather than embrace what the enthusiasts are doing now and change their marketing models, the entertainment industry sees all these things that people are doing as a threat! People are creative, they're converting their bought format of music and are digitizing it for their MP3 players. People have devised bit torrents as way to share vast libraries of TV shows and music with each other. And more and more software is being produced by innovators in order to manipulate single formatted entertainment products into multiple format platforms in order to be used in a variety of different players. This is a golden opportunity which the entertainment industry isn't just squandering, they are outright squashing their own future! 
 
And finally about movies, there are many movie nuts that would love to see workprint versions (not yet completed) of movies and other such types of movies yet to be released! The industry is missing out on a huge opportunity here! On the Internet, some industry insiders post unfinished versions of movies and people are downloading those copies for free. Why not organize movie enthusiasts into a new source of critical feedback. People would have to fill out forms first in order to be chosen based on how many movies they see per week and you would also need to have applicants fill out a sample feedback questionnaire to see if their critique skills are strong. But you could then use an army of highly motivated movie enthusiasts and you could allow them to access uncompleted versions of movies via downloading on the Internet and get their feedback! But this future option will now vanish because you entertainment executives are trying to do everything in your power to hold onto your buggy industry at the expense of the future development of the car! 
 
If bill c-61 passes into law, we as a nation at the turn of the 21st century will be dragged back into the 20th century thanks to the unenlightened and fear mongering entertainment industry!
Written by Unimpressed on 2008-06-14 15:44:53
what every one of us that has a harper associated MP in our area needs to do is recall every on of them. a bill that doens't have a party to stand behimd it will fail. in most areas it's 10000 signatures to have them recalled. that would force how many bielections across the country. more even keep doing it tell they get the picture, thus BKO the parties that will come into power trying to force their will onto canadians.  
 
ok so to get this right if we use a VPN to access content through say a country that has no DRM laws then, the companies that are ISP's will be forced to break the encryption. Thus allowing us to file civil suits against our ISP's.  
 
What is Canada comming to. I would be glad to host a site that has allows access to recall petitions for ever MP that would need to be recalled to force them out of goverment or even further reduce their minority goverment. This is what it means to be a democrocey, in canada we ahve the power to force them out of goverment.
online petition

Written by unimpressed on 2008-06-14 16:55:59
If ur also unimpressed by the Bill C-61 sign the online petition [ link ]
Meat Protests

Written by John Doe on 2008-06-14 18:54:55
Mike, 
 
Where are the physical rallies? 
 
I refuse to use Facebook, so I'm out of touch I think. 
 
Where are the meat protests? 
 
/Hopes it's on a weekend not a weekday 
 
//We will show these corporate shills that we are not pushovers.
WHERE'S THE LOGIC?

Written by Anonymous on 2008-06-14 21:29:34
so... 
if i record a show on my PVR for 20 seconds while im going to the washroom... i get fined 500 bucks? What's the logic here? Rogers and Bell are probably back against this. if there was one to fine for this, it would be rogers or bell cuz they provide the PVR. And so if the gov't adds trackers to those PVRs, that would be a breach of privacy. So WHERE'S THE LOGIC? 
 
Also, Canada should be focusing on its main issues, like drugs, gun crime, etc, and not dumping their money on this. this isn't the priorty right now; it should be using the money to curb drug use, or TO improve health care, that kinda stuff.  
 
This is a pointless, waste of time. it's very hard to track the people, and its like wasting taxpayers money on unimportant issues.  
 
I AM UNIMPRESSED BY THIS BILL.
Written by on 2008-06-15 09:57:22
Hey thats great!!! What the government will accomplish with this new bill is create a much MUCH LARGER hacker comuntiy! Its kind of like the old saying goes "when you outlaw guns only outlaws have guns". In this instance if you don't want to allow people to use the internet freely or allow your citizens free access to information, we'll get it anyways, always thought I lived in a free country but lately I'm not so sure, stephen harper does things that would make stalin blush, then again old stevie boy has his head so far up bush's ass it isn't funny, it really sucks when another country has your country's leader on a leash, especially bush. I don't hate the US by the way, I just think that the government needs a new leader, much like ours. Now I'd better watch out or the thought police will be here to make me dissapear...I hear someone coming...well gotta go, they want me to put my hands on the wall and not move!
Written by No Canada on 2008-06-15 14:45:56
This bill violates the rights of my privacy and the property that I've purchased. In which way does this bill protect me or give me rights that I don't already have as a consumer. To charge me upwards or $20,000 per song cause it has DRM on it is ridiculous.  
 
So what if I can't pay the fine, how long will I be jailed for copying one cd or movie, if I copy enough, can I be in prison a longer then charges extend for murder? Where is the Canada in this bill? If this bill goes through 90% of the people I know will be joining me. The other 10% don't even know how to turn on a Computer, so I guess they are safe. 
 
This also looks as if it's also using Canada as a testing ground for what they want to do to the US laws, because it is stricter then their laws IMO.
Written by what? on 2008-06-15 16:01:07
So in other words... I can drive 30km/h over the speed limit, through a school zone, severely endangering the lives of all the children leaving school and playing nearby, and expect a fine of, what, 300 bucks? BUT if I convert ONE of my songs into a medium more convenient to me, somehow my atrocious crime is worth 500 dollars? WHAT???
How Much Worse Can it Get?

Written by How Much Worse Can it Get? on 2008-06-15 20:14:52
First, the government tries to introduce this bill under the radar in December and realize that there is opposition. So what do they do, they make it worse and reintroduce right before parliament breaks for the summer to avoid a parliamentary committee to look into the issue. I am appalled by this behavior and believe that this is the start of the end of the internet.  
 
Shit, should I be writing this? Harper and his army of Cabinet Ministers are probably violating my privacy right now by tracing this comment right now and are going to force me to take it down because it badmouths the government? That sounds a lot like China to me. Doesn\'t it? 
 
In all seriousness, the fact is that the \"Made \'WORSE\' in Canada\" DMCA is going to bring the internet back to its roots. This is not only a copy of the US DMCA, but it is worse. It appears that the Canadian Government has found all the worst parts of the US DMCA, put them in the Canadian DMCA and made them more restrictive and worse for consumers.  
 
I hope that Harper loses his job over this. This world would be a better place without ignorant bill drafters who don\'t know the implications of a bill becoming law.  
 
On another note, I am all for the recall petitions. If someone could set that up, I think everyone (other than the ignorant Conservative government) would be thankful.  
 
 
I AM EXTREMELY UNIMPRESSED WITH THIS BILL AND I HAVE NOT EVEN SCRAPED THE SURFACE AS TO ITS IMPLICATIONS ON CANADIANS!!!
Viva the Piratocracy!

Written by Metro on 2008-06-16 13:08:15
To push the MPAA's will 
To make another zillion bucks 
The Cons have introduced a bill 
That will make crooks out of Canucks 
 
They also haven't (did you note) 
Get rid of the "blank media" fee 
Before they settled down and wrote 
That we are thieves, both me and thee 
 
And since a crook I have been cast 
For using music I have bought 
I'll be a pirate to the last  
And act just as a pirate ought 
 
My status I shall rightful claim 
I'll by no tunes, nor movies, no 
Not if I can download the same 
And to the Cons I shout "Yo-ho!" 
 
The December Bill

Written by on 2008-06-16 16:31:57
In point #1 Mr. Geist mentions that the December bill did not contain these provisions...really...and how Mr. Geist did you see the December bill that never made into the HOC? Why do I suspect that you don't have an answer for that one.
C61 opens door for DMCA chill and RIAA l

Written by David G on 2008-06-18 17:05:04
One of my major concerns with this flawed Bill even beyond its imbalanced approach to legitimate consumers is that Canadians will be opened to the same chilling effects that we have seen in the US over the last 10 years with DCMA and the heavy handed and flawed tactics of organizations like RIAA and their agents who have violated the intellectual property rights of others and arguably committed criminal acts in pursuit of their own agenda (see link for more information). 
 
 
[ link ]
Written by Thomas Whittaker on 2008-06-18 19:00:38
I own a DVR device provided to me by my television cable provider. I believe I have paid to view the programs provided via my cable service and should not have the right to view these programs at my own convenience taken away.
Written by Thomas Whittaker on 2008-06-18 19:00:46
I own a DVR device provided to me by my television cable provider. I believe I have paid to view the programs provided via my cable service and should not have the right to view these programs at my own convenience taken away.
Written by on 2008-06-22 22:35:39
so when do i need to start worrying about all this and quit downloading music?
DJs

Written by Mike on 2008-06-23 15:04:08
I can just see it now. They will start busting raves for the public music playing... who cares about the drugs, GET THE DJ!
Written by on 2008-06-24 03:27:29
WoW Gold,WoW Gold,WoW Gold,WoW Gold,WoW Gold,WoW Gold,WoW Gold,WoW Gold,WoW Gold 
 
come here to view this news, now all wow players canBuy Wow Gold and Cheap WoW Gold,very Cheap WoW Gold from our website,we have much wow gold for sale,we supply cheapest wow gold for you, if you have more gold in wow ,you can also sell wow gold to us ,as we have more wow gold sale, so you can purchase gold for wow and gold in wow game, from here you can buy cheap wow gold or wow gold us. we also have gold wow and conan gold on sale. 
 
Masters of the hunt, wilderness buy conan gold trackers and the strongest ranged DPS in cheap conan gold, Hunters play an essential role in the dangerous cheapest conan gold land of Azeroth. Able to tame wild animals to serve as age of conan gold loyal companions, Hunters are excellent soloers buy age of conan gold and can single-handedly fight multiple beasts simultaneously and cheap age of conan gold still emerge victorious. Their strength lies in long-ranged cheapest age of conan gold combat, but Hunters are still quite capable aoc gold up close in melee. They are easily considered one of the strongest overall characters in buy aoc gold and have quickly become a popular favourite for many players.One of the key unique cheap aoc gold powers of the Hunter is their ability to track a variety of creatures. Unlike Druids who can only Track Humanoids, Hunters can track virtually everything; elementals, cheapest aoc gold beasts, humanoids and even hidden and sheathed creatures! This ability, plus their incredibly high Damage-Per-Second (DPS) coupled with their trained pet, makes the world of warcraft gold Hunter the most valued farming class in the game. Not only are Hunters capable in solo-combat, but they bring a buy world of warcraft gold lot to a group as well. Often employed as pullers, Hunters greatly reduce the risk of pulling too many creatures with their Feign Death cheap world of warcraft gold ability. Their traps have been used to Crowd Control (CC) creatures, allowing a party of adventurers precious seconds to take cheapest world of warcraft gold a bad situation under control. Even traveling, a Hunter can assist, using their Pack Aspects to aid their group's movement.Here sell world of warcraft gold at wowgold1000.com, we know the full value of the Hunter and we know how to make them the best character they can be. Some world of warcraft gold sale bosses in raid dungeons cannot be aegwynn gold defeated without the assistance of Hunters - so vital are their abilities. With buy aegwynn gold our help, your Hunter can be a leading raid character in no time, helping a cheap aegwynn gold Guild take down mighty beasts such as Magmadar and Chromaggus. We know the best specializations to take depending on what you want aegwynn us gold,buy aegwynn us gold,cheap aegwynn us gold your Hunter to be and can maximize your character's potential. Speak to one of our representatives now and get your Hunter where you aegwynn alliance gold,aegwynn alliance us gold want him or her to be, fast! Despite Cairne Gold the painful lessons learned by the Blood Elves, not all of the WoW Cairne Gold,Buy Cairne Gold denizens of Azeroth have abandoned the dangerous use of the arcane arts. Mages are some such people. Tapping into the primordial Cheap Cairne Gold,Cairne US Gold energies of Fire, Ice and Arcana, Mages Cairne Alliance Gold,Cairne Horde Gold shape the most powerful elements of the world and use them to WoW Gold Cairne Server blast their foes into oblivion. A Cairne Gold WoW balanced, resourceful and Discount WoW Gold powerful class, Mages wow power leveling,wow powerleveling are one of the most valued in any group - be it a normal hunting party, a raid group power leveling,powerleveling or PVP. Mages can dish out the damage fast, while simultaneously able to wow powerleveling,wow power leveling perform supporting functions such as teleporting power level,powerlevel groups to major cities, creating food and water, or buffing the intelligence of their party members. 
Without a doubt, Mages are cheap powerleveling,cheap power leveling a necessary part of almost any group. Those specializing wow powerlevel,wow power level in the Arcane talent tree powerleveling 60 70,powerleveling 1 70,power leveling 60 70,power leveling 1 70 can go all out on damage, annihilating even the strongest opponents within a matter of seconds. Mages seeking survivability at the cost rs powerleveling,rs power leveling,lineage 2 powerleveling of Damage-Per-Second (DPS) instead go with the Frost talents, armoring themselves in solid blocks of ice that render them completely l2 power leveling immune to damage. 
 
while also slowing down their opponents 10000 wow gold so that they have more time to nuke them buy 10000 wow gold down. Mages specializing in Fire are a dangerous breed, burning their opponents to cinders in a matter of seconds with their cheap 10000 gold awesome Pyroblast spells. One of buy cheap 10000 gold their key features though, is Polymorph. This function is a major part of the success of adventuring bands, as it helps 9000 wow gold,buy 9000 wow gold Crowd Control (CC) a situation buy cheap 9000 gold and ensure the survival of the party. 
The best feature of the Mage cheap 9000 gold class is their overall utility. Able to produce their own water and food, teleport to any major city and regenerate mana 8000 wow gold using a variety of summoned gemstones and talents, Mages are a completely self-sufficient class, extremely capable in soloing and buy 8000 wow gold,buy cheap 8000 gold groups. No class in World of Warcraft can match a Mage's Area-Of-Effect (AOE) spells which are essential to cheap 8000 gold the success of high level 7000 wow gold raiding groups. Wowgold1000.com professionals buy 7000 wow gold are intimately familiar with buy cheap 7000 gold Mages and their wide range of abilities. We can cheap 7000 gold help your Mage 6000 wow gold reach the top of his or her buy 6000 wow gold,buy cheap 6000 gold,cheap 6000 gold,5000 wow gold,buy 5000 wow gold game with great service at reasonable buy cheap 5000 gold,cheap 5000 gold prices. Contact us to today and let us know how we can help 4000 wow gold you make the most of your character. Perhaps the Paladin's greatest weakness is his lack of ranged offense. However, most agree that he buy 4000 wow gold,buy cheap 4000 gold more than makes up for this in being extremely tough to kill. Wearing the best armor type in the game, buffed with Auras, Blessings cheap 4000 gold,3000 wow gold and healing spells, a Paladin is an adversary to be respected and feared. The Paladin has several unique abilities: Auras are buffs buy 3000 wow gold,2000 wow gold that affect the entire party within a certain radius and last as long as the Paladin keeps it active and is alive. Blessings buy 2000 wow gold,buy cheap 2000 gold are short-duration buffs that a Paladin can cast on party members - although they do not last long, they have great effect cheap 2000 gold,1000 wow gold and can often mean the difference between life and death. Paladins most often serve as tanks and healers in groups, able to take Buy 1000 wow gold the damage most creatures dish out and deal damage in return. Although they lack the maximum healing abilities of a Priest, their Buy cheap 1000 gold spells are some of the most mana-efficient for healing, making them the best secondary healers the Alliance has to offer. Combined Cheap 1000 gold 
with their ability to purge any cheap 3000 gold affliction from themselves and their allies, along with the power to become invulnerable or sacrifice their own life to save the life buy cheap 3000 gold of a comrade, a Paladin's usefulness in a group or raid cannot be underestimated. 
 

Write Comment

Name
Subject
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage

Enter text from image

Powered by AkoComment 2.0! and SecurityImage 3.0.4

Related Items: