The poster children for this legislation are BitTorrent sites such as IsoHunt. Other targets of the enablement provision are sites such as Megaupload. These claims are ridiculous, though not surprising given his historical antipathy to laws designed to protect the creative industries from theft. To be clear, SOPA was intended to target foreign rogue websites that would already be illegal under U.
This is long overdue. The current wave of opposition to the amendments appears to be an opportunist effort to turn the tide on effective copyright reform by leveraging anti-SOPA public opinion. The amendments that are being objected to were first tabled before the Parliamentary Committee examining Bill C in March and were publically disseminated even by Mr.
Geist, well before the SOPA ruckus. At that time there was no public opposition to the proposed amendments as going too far. The new argument that amendments would cover sites such as YouTube is spurious. Bill C provides a series of criteria that a court would need to consider in determining if a site primarily enables infringement.
The targeted sites are those: promoted to enable acts of infringement; that know they are being used to enable significant infringements; that have no significant uses other than enabling infringement; that benefit from enabling infringement; and that would be economically unviable but for enabling infringement.
The government has acknowledged that technical amendments to Bill C are required. Canadians will all be hurt if the debate continues to be marred by political opportunism and misinformation spread for political purposes. Financial Post barrysookman. Sign up to receive the daily top stories from the Financial Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc. Does that diminish the value of being able to say whatever you want? It's a question thousands of Canadians are asking themselves right now as the federal government will over the next few months push through new copyright legislation — Bill C — that willfully ignores their concerns.
The chief issue with the legislation is a clause that would make it illegal to break digital locks on electronic content or devices. While C introduces a raft of new beneficent rights for the ordinary person, such as making it explicitly legal to copy a CD onto an iPod or mash-up content into a YouTube video, many are worried that the lock provision will act as a negative "super-clause" that will trump all the other good stuff.
In other words, if you want to copy that CD onto your iPod, go right ahead — unless the record label that produced it says you can't. Want to delve into the electronic guts of your video game console, laptop or DVR to see how it works, perhaps with an eye to improving it? That'll be off limits because the manufacturer says so. During nation-wide consultations — a hallmark of a country that respects free speech — in , government officials were told repeatedly by the thousands who attended that such a super-clause was a non-starter.
More than 6, individuals followed up in writing, as did a bevy of organizations representing everyone from teachers, retailers, libraries, artists and privacy commissioners. Dissenters suggest a compromise, that the lock clause be amended so that it applies only in cases of willful copyright infringement.
In other words, if you're running a business that somehow makes money from cracked digital locks, you're offside. But if you're an individual who breaks a DVD's copy protection so that you can put a copy on your iPad, you're clear.
You can find our privacy policy here. By OpenMedia February 28 Global: Answers about the Copyright Modernization Act We've been putting most of our effort into stopping online spying lately, but it's just one of a handful of threats to the Internet on the horizon. Read more » -- Read more at globaltvedmonton. Related Posts. Government must release submissions to harmful content online consultation October 26 You should have the right to repair your devices in the United States October 25 Join our community!
FAQ Privacy Policy.
0コメント