Ottawa to unveil controversial copyright bill

Voting Liberal doesn't seem so bad anymore.

I don't recall this one being touted as a confidence matter, so I doubt it will pass.

from what I have seen I hope it doesn't. Unless they have changed it since it was leaked a while ago.

I hope it does get defeated. I don't like the look of this bill at all.

I haven't paid a lot of attention to it, but what don't you like about it? I think it's high time we had stronger copyright laws in Canada. People who create IP need stronger protection.

well for starters I don't like the fact that under this bill, I can get charged from transferring media I already bought to a digital player.

Whats up with that?

I haven't paid a lot of attention to it, but what don't you like about it? I think it's high time we had stronger copyright laws in Canada. People who create IP need stronger protection.

I gotta say, I'm with you on this one. If we are going to have such a thing as intellectual property and artist's copyright, then there shoul dbe some teeth behind the law protecting it.

Im haven't read the bill, but if it primarily contains fines for illegal downloading, I don't have a problme wiht that. But if it attempts to "deputize" ISPs by forcing them to turn over infomration on their clinet without a seearch warrant, then I have a big problem with it.

I haven't paid a lot of attention to it, but what don't you like about it? I think it's high time we had stronger copyright laws in Canada. People who create IP need stronger protection.

I gotta say, I'm with you on this one. If we are going to have such a thing as intellectual property and artist's copyright, then there shoul dbe some teeth behind the law protecting it.

Im haven't read the bill, but if it primarily contains fines for illegal downloading, I don't have a problme wiht that. But if it attempts to "deputize" ISPs by forcing them to turn over infomration on their clinet without a seearch warrant, then I have a big problem with it.

And the punishments are excessive. How can you justify a $500 fine for downloading something worth on the order of a dollar?

Actually, it could be $500 per infringement, so if you've been a busy boy, that fine could easily be $5,000, even $50K. That might be a bit exrtreme for an individual, but I don't think a $500 fine is exorbitant in this day and age.

In the general theory of deterrence, it has been shown that individuals factor in the probability of getting caught, and not the magnitude of the punishment, when deciding whether or not to breeak the law. (In other words doubling speeding fines doesn't work nearly as well as doubling the amount of cop cars cracking down on speeders).

I guess the question I would have is--how are downloaders going to get caught? I would support handing out a ton of $500 fines as opposed to hammering a few unlucky schmuks with massive penalties.

Shoplifting a $1 dollar item can come with a jail term and a $500 fine so what's the difference?

The law is attempting to put IP more on par with physical property and, in this, it is not a bad idea.

we have must more stringent privacy laws in Canada than the US. I fail to see who this would be enforceable outside of the "really big" offenders. You won't get a warrant on a 'suspicion' of wrong doing.

Shoplifting a $1 dollar item can come with a jail term and a $500 fine so what's the difference?

The law is attempting to put IP more on par with physical property and, in this, it is not a bad idea.

But if I walked into a convenience store and took a box of chocolate bars, they're not going to give me a $500 fine for each bar. If I download a CD, they could fine me $500 for each song. That's BS.

Or, let me put it this way, if I shoplift a CD, that's one item. If I download it, that's each song. How is that rational?

What sort of dick makes a law benefiting the few? Fuck harper and his backward thinking.

Instead of imposing legal boundaries on what people can or can't do with the things they purchase, the industries need to wake up and use the technology to its advantage.

Imagine if there were private torrent sites that included a monthly fee, and the "owners" of the media were given a percentage of those based on their share of the site's total peer-to-peer downloads.

The users win by being guaranteed quality downloads, and the industry wins by simply allowing the users do all their distribution for them.

I see this "war on downloading" being as successful as prohibition, so producers might as well make it work for them.

I have no problem supporting IP, but this law seems far too aggressive.

What we need are laws that are enforceable. Make actual copying a movie in the theatre a crime, like stealing a car. Right all a theatre can do is ask the person to leave. If the law was written properly, police would escort them out in handcuffs.

I also agree with Hurley that stealing a CD and downloading a CD are the same. It makes no sense to give someone $5000 in fines for downlaoding a CD, but only $500 for stealing it from HMV.

The big problem here is that the music industry is desperately trying to hold onto a business model that no longer works. iTunes has sold over 3 billion songs (at .99 each), meaning that the industry has received a lot of money form iTunes, not to mention other legal download services. Had the music industry been smart, they would have gone to Napster and told them to charge a monthly fee and then taken 50% (or more) of it. Both parties would have made a lot of money and this issue wouldn't exist. Instead they crushed Napspter and opened Pandora's box, relasing P2P in a huge way. I don't ever see illegal downloading going away now.

The movie industry, on the other hand, loses most of lost income from people in the industry selling DVD screeners to disreputable people, who then put it on BitTorrent. Others copy the movie in the theatre and sell it online or on the streets of New York for a few bucks. Their problem is far easier to solve.