Rob’s Personal Aggregator

A website in support of Canada’s proposed US-style copyright law looks to be a work of corporate astroturf, and signs point to the Canadian Record Industry Association (mostly composed of US record labels; many Canadian labels have left to form an independent lobby that opposes much of CRIA’s agenda) as the entity behind it. The group, Balanced Copyright for Canada, has bought headline placement on Bourque, and recently took down its member list after TVOntario reporter Jesse Brown announced that it appeared to consist of record execs from CRIA’s member-companies.

The site provides talking-points for its supporters to use when contacting media outlets over their coverage of the bill, which criminalizes breaking “digital locks” on the copyrighted works you buy, even if all you’re trying to do is lawfully enjoy your property. Canadians came out in overwhelming numbers to oppose this approach in the Canadian government’s consultation on copyright (over 6000 opposed, fewer than 50 in favour), but the Conservative government has ignored their own consultation and made a law that plays into the hands of the US media companies.

It’s really telling that the opposition to the Canadian DMCA has come from real grassroots: artist groups, citizen groups, technologists, educators, disabled-rights groups, archivists — people who don’t hide their funding or their affiliations behind false flags. Meanwhile, the only support for this law has come from slick, fraudulent PR campaigns that shroud their origins in secrecy in order to disguise the fact that this is just the same four record labels running around in circles, wearing several hats, pretending to be a crowd.

The Copyright Lobby’s Astroturf Campaign in Support of C-32

Possibly Related posts

• Relevance meets the real-time web (0)
• Local Experts share a few spots in Vancouver (0)
• LibDems won’t support Digital Economy Bill at all (0)
• A new approach to China: an update (0)
• ​And now for something completely different (0)

Gary sez, “In an time of making more and more government information available online for free, the province of British Columbia decided to begin charging for access to legal docs in January of this year.

Now, in a reversal of plans, British Columbia will once again provide free access to BC legal documents.”

Possibly Related posts

• Your world, your base map (0)
• Why is the secret copyright treaty a secret? (0)
• Video explains Canada's DMCA (0)
• US record labels starts fake “citizen’s group” to support Canada’s DMCA (0)
• US passports can be read and copied from a moving car using a $250 rig (0)

A Canadian who was deported to Syria by the US government for a hellish, 10.5 month torture ordeal will not get justice in the USA.

Maher Arar is a Syrian-born Canadian and father who was arrested while passing through the US on his way home to Canada. The Canadian government provided US authorities with bad intelligence suggesting Arar had ties to Al Qaeda. Arar was deported to Syria where he was held in a 3′x6′x7′ cell for 10 and a half months, during which time he was brutally tortured.

The Canadian government investigated Arar’s case, concluded that he was not a terrorist, had no ties to terrorists, and had been unjustly detained and tortured, and paid him $10.5 million.

Arar has tried to clear his name in the US — he is still considered a terrorist there, as is his family — but no court has heard his case, because the US government (including the Obama administration) claims that allowing the case to be heard would compromise national security. The Supreme Court has now refused to hear Arar’s case.

Upon his release, Arar sued Bush’s Justice Department, but his lawsuit was rejected by a succession of U.S. courts, in part out of deference to the executive branch’s claim that national security would be harmed by allowing a federal judge to review the relevant evidence. That’s a common legal maneuver that was used frequently by the Bush administration, and which Obama pledged to use less often. So far, those promises have been proven to be empty…

Arar and his family remain on a U.S. watch list, and the United States has never officially apologized or admitted it made a mistake.

Instead, Obama’s Justice Department told the Supreme Court that Arar’s case remained too secret for justice, and that the U.S. law offers no recourse for him.

Supreme Court Rejects Case of Tortured Canadian

(Image: Maherarar.ca/Bill Grimshaw)

Possibly Related posts

• Your world, your base map (0)
• Working with multi-regional websites (0)
• Why is the secret copyright treaty a secret? (0)
• What is a browser? (0)
• Web-Based Tracks Keeps Your GTD System in Order [Downloads] (0)

Michael Geist sez, “The day after the Canadian government introduced the Canadian DMCA, I spoke at the GRAND Annual Conference in Ottawa. While the full talk discussed recent attempts at copyright reform, I’ve pulled the discussion on C-32 into its own video. The 16 minute talk – a combination of slides and audio (recorded off an iPhone so excuse the quality) – breaks down the major elements in the bill, including the some of the good elements and the huge problem with the digital lock provisions.”

Bill C-32: Dissecting Canada’s New Copyright Bill

Possibly Related posts

• Your world, your base map (0)
• Why is the secret copyright treaty a secret? (0)
• US record labels starts fake “citizen’s group” to support Canada’s DMCA (0)
• US passports can be read and copied from a moving car using a $250 rig (0)
• UK Govt’s Pressure On Canadian Tax Breaks Hits Dead End‭ (0)

Michael Geist sez,

As expected, the Canadian government today introduced its own DMCA [ed: the US copyright law that has been in place for 12 years, resulting in tens of thousands of lawsuits against Americans without having any effect on infringement or delivering any new income to artists]. Despite a full national consultation and a public rejection of the old Bill C-61, discouragingly some things have not changed. Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore won the internal fight over Industry Minister Tony Clement for a repeat of C-61’s digital lock provisions and against a flexible fair dealing approach and today’s bill reflects those policy victories.

However, over the past month, Clement made steady in-roads in trying to restore some balance in the bill and achieved some wins. The bill contains some important extensions of fair dealing, including new exceptions for parody, satire, and (most notably) education. It also contains more sensible time shifting and format shifting provisions that still feature restrictions (they do not apply where there is a digital lock) but are more technology neutral than the C-61 model. There is also a “YouTube exception” that grants Canadians the right to create remixed user generated content for non-commercial purposes under certain circumstances. While still not as good as a flexible fair dealing provision, the compromise is a pretty good one. Throw in notice-and-notice for Internet providers, backup copying, and some important changes to the statutory damages regime for non-commercial infringement and there are some provisions worth fighting to keep.

Yet all the attempts at balance come with a giant caveat that has huge implications for millions of Canadians. The foundational principle of the new bill remains that any time a digital lock is used – whether on books, movies, music, or electronic devices – the lock trumps virtually all other rights. In other words, in the battle between two sets of property rights – those of the intellectual property rights holder and those of the consumer who has purchased the tangible or intangible property – the IP rights holder always wins. This represents market intervention for a particular business model by a government supposedly committed to the free market and it means that the existing fair dealing rights (including research, private study, news reporting, criticism, and review) and the proposed new rights (parody, satire, education, time shifting, format shifting, backup copies) all cease to function effectively so long as the rights holder places a digital lock on their content or device. Moreover, the digital lock approach is not limited to fair dealing – library provisions again include a requirement for digital copies to self-destruct within five days and distance learning teaching provisions require the destruction of materials 30 days after the course concludes.

The digital lock provisions are by far the biggest flaw in the bill, rules that some will argue renders it beyond repair. I disagree. The flaw must be fixed, but there is much to support within the proposal. There will undoubtedly be attacks on the fair dealing reforms and pressure to repeal them, along with the U.S. and the copyright lobby demanding that their digital lock provisions be left untouched. If Canadians stay quiet, both are distinct possibilities. If they speak out, perhaps a fixable bill can be fixed. I’m relaunching Speak Out on Copyright.ca to focus on this bill and encouraging Canadians to join the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group(to get active) and the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook Page (to stay updated).

The Canadian Copyright Bill: Flawed But Fixable

Possibly Related posts

• Your world, your base map (0)
• Which Media Center Is Right for You: Boxee, XBMC, and Windows Media Center Compared [Lifehacker Showdown] (0)
• Ultimate Guide to Twitter – Marketing, Tips, Best Practices & More (0)
• Supporting Facebook Share and RDFa for videos (0)
• Set Up a Geeky Media Center that Non-Geeks Can Actually Use [Windows Media Center] (0)