Piracy

[Kuciwalker]

btw, Canada is signatory to the Berne Convention, which I think would make any exemption from copyright law based on the media levy illegal.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Kuciwalker, it's apparent that you aren't following the evolution of the copyright debate in this country. Which is fine, but it forces me to say the same things over and over, and that's becoming tiresome.

Anyone can sue anyone else. Whether they win is another story. The recording industry has tried here and failed.

I've made my points to my satisfaction, and I'm outta here. Feel free to respond any way you like - you're welcome to your own version of morality and proportion. But I'm not losing any sleep over the negligible harm that I'm doing by downloading, and I'm not losing sleep over the prospect of being sued, because in effect, I've already paid for my downloads.

[Wezil]

Kuci - There are several sites with loads of information (Cdn Copyright Act and Case Law). Just a couple for you -

from: http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml

On March 19, 1998, new federal copyright legislation came into force. Among other things, the legislation provides for a levy to be collected on blank audio recording media.

It is called a levy (and not a tax) because it is not collected by any level of government, it is collected by a group representing the recording industry. In a letter to the Copyright Board of Canada released Monday, January 18, 1999, the five collectives that filed tariffs for a proposed levy on blank audio recording media announced the creation of the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC).

The Copyright Board decides on the amount of the levy and what media it applies to. The CPCC submits its proposed levies and the Copyright Board holds hearings to hear any objections to the proposed levy amounts. Note that the Copyright Board CANNOT change the law, they can only determine the levy value and the media to which it will apply. The levy can be set for a 1- or 2-year period. So far, all of the periods set and requested have been 2 years.

The first time the Copyright Board set the levy was December 17, 1999.

Legislation and cases can be found here:

http://www.cla.ca/resources/copyright.htm

I think you will like this:

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/01/11/copyright-canada.html

Copyright law changes could leave consumers vulnerable
Last Updated: Thursday, January 11, 2007 | 9:39 AM ET
The Canadian Press
Ever recorded a television show or a movie so you can watch it later? Or ripped a CD so you can listen to it on your MP3 player?

With changes to Canada's copyright laws expected as early as next month, these mundane 21st century activities could theoretically be open to prosecution — unless the Conservative government steps in with expanded "fair use" or "fair dealing" protections for consumers.

Close observers of the file say all signs point to a new regime that will improve safeguards for major music, film and media companies and artists for unpaid use of their material, but neglect to make exemptions for personal use of copyrighted content.

'About as market interventionist as you can get'
"We're dealing with an industry minister [Maxime Bernier] that's tried to extricate government from the telecom area with a very strong deregulatory focus," said Michael Geist, the Canada Research Chair of Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa.

"Yet the kind of copyright reform that is being contemplated is about as market interventionist as you can get."

Amendments to the Copyright Act are fraught with problems, since there are so many players with contradictory views.

Continue Article

Exacerbating the situation is intense pressure from the United States, where Canada is considered a rogue when it comes to copyright and intellectual property. It still hasn't ratified a 1997 World Intellectual Property Organization copyright treaty.

Sources say the new legislation is ready, but Bernier and Heritage Minister Bev Oda are struggling on final wording. Two of the most controversial issues are called digital rights management and the closely related technological protection measures.

'People just assume it's free'
Graham Henderson of the Canadian Recording Industry Association, one of Canada's top lobbyists for stiffer copyright controls, notes that a variety of digital services have taken off in the United States and started to make up a large percentage of music revenues.

"In Canada, that's not happening and it's not happening because we have a culture here where people just assume it's free," said Henderson.

"It's a big black market effect and so instead of 25 per cent [of the market], it's eight per cent here. People are simply abandoning the marketplace altogether, and they've made the decision they'll just download the music and worry about how the artist gets paid later."

Exemptions for consumers urged
But what does this mean for the consumer who legitimately buys a song or a film, and wants to use it on several different devices?

Consumer advocates, such as Ottawa-based lawyer Howard Knopf, are urging the government to protect Canadians with wide exemptions in the Copyright Act for "fair use."

As well, a group of Canadian musicians, including the Barenaked Ladies and Broken Social Scene, have come out against the technological protection measures, arguing they actually stifle creativity and their relationship with consumers.

[Kuciwalker]

Thank you, Wezil. So 6kyom's (absurd, IMO) proposition that the blank media levy gave him the legal right to pirate was false.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Thank you, Wezil. So 6kyom's (absurd, IMO) proposition that the blank media levy gave him the legal right to pirate was false.

Thus far the case law supports him.

[Kuciwalker]

Nothing you posted said that...

[Kuciwalker]

Consider the economic implications of a system where music is funded solely through a levy on blank media, btw...

[Wezil]

Show me a conviction.

[Kuciwalker]

it's nearly impossible to detect DLing in the first place. Lack of convictions comes from lack of evidence.

[Wezil]

My brief skim of the cases seem to indictate "privacy" concerns as the major failings in the prosecutions.

Regardless of the reasons, a law that cannot be enforced is akin to no law.

[Kuciwalker]

"privacy concerns" != "the blank levy gives me the right to DL whatever I want"

Regardless of the reasons, a law that cannot be enforced is akin to no law.

It gives a decent moral case that what 6kyom is doing is wrong, though - and ought to be punishable even if, for practical reasons, it is not.

[Wezil]

I think morally STYOM is right. The levee is collected by the industry to compenstae for lost revenue. He has paid them. I have not heard the industry asking for a repeal of the levee.

The law (or lack thereof) is unenforcable in its current form. Perhaps a new law (if passed) would change the situation here to make it more similar to the US. Until then, the legal situations are markedly different.