The Needles: Crash Course in IP Enforcement Strategy

cmstewart87

Requirer of MORE Supply Depots
Feb 18, 2010
30
0
0
dududf said:
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said at a Washington D.C. press conference announcing the strategy. "Clean and simple. It's smash and grab. It ain't no different than smashing a window at Tiffany's and grabbing [merchandise]."

Get it right people. There's a difference.

Anyone else tired of the US trying to make everyone else in the world like the US? Because it's getting kinda annoying.

Funny thing here America. If China and England called in their debts on you Right Now There wouldn't be an America anymore. Just something to think about when you try pushing everyone else around.

I don't care what you do in your own borders, but it stops at the border.
If they called their debts then the entire world economy would crash. So in turn literally screwing yourself over.

Also when the US plays nice everyone tells us its annoying but when we stop everyone says we're assholes. so in turn we'd rather be annoying than assholes because being annoying means you'll stop bothering us. =P

Also Definition of Piracy: "Piracy is a war-like act committed by private parties (not affiliated with any government) that engage in acts of robbery and/or criminal violence at sea."

And commenting on the borders bit. What you're saying is that if you created game that you were charging $20 per copy for and I bought the copy, left the country, and then gave it away online for free to everyone losing you many, many customers. You would be fine with it because I was doing it outside your borders? Makes a whole lot of sense.

All it all, making something yours without paying your dues whether you steal it or copy it..you are still taking something that is not yours thus theft thus illegal thus your picture is invalid.
 

cmstewart87

Requirer of MORE Supply Depots
Feb 18, 2010
30
0
0
Ewyx said:
IP laws are fucked. However, they're skewed toward powerful corporations, and not in the interest of the public and creativity. Go figure.

10 years. After that it should be public domain, if you can't make a profit in 10 years. You're obviously doing something horribly wrong.
I agree with you there. 10 years even 20 years is fine but 70 something years after the death of the creator and other random extension laws is stupid. You can thank Mickey Mouse for that crap. Oh Disney, you made all of your stories based off old famous writings proudly showing how sharing content can be great and then decided you wanted it all for yourself. Selfish dicks.
 

dududf

New member
Aug 31, 2009
4,072
0
0
cmstewart87 said:
The borders bit was referring to the government trying to get others countries to have the same laws as they do in clarification. I don't give a damn if it's right or wrong in USA, but don't go trying to make everywhere else a mini USA. It's a different country for a reason.

And the picture is still valid.

Software piracy copies, it does not remove. Theft removes.
 

cmstewart87

Requirer of MORE Supply Depots
Feb 18, 2010
30
0
0
dududf said:
cmstewart87 said:
The borders bit was referring to the government trying to get others countries to have the same laws as they do in clarification. I don't give a damn if it's right or wrong in USA, but don't go trying to make everywhere else a mini USA. It's a different country for a reason.

And the picture is still valid.

Software piracy copies, it does not remove. Theft removes.
Ok I misunderstood the borders thing and in that sense I agree with you. and even if the picture is valid in your eyes its still wrong to do for anything other than having a backup.
 

Cynical skeptic

New member
Apr 19, 2010
799
0
0
Veylon said:
The damages are, I'll admit, hard to see. But, let's take an example. Charles Dickens writes "A Christmas Carol" and sells it to a publisher, who sells a thousand copies. Then another publisher sells another thousand copies, but pays Mr. Dickens nothing. What they stole wasn't copies of books, but customers and sales. Mr. Dickens has a right to make something, sell it at a price of his choosing and benefit from whatever profits (if any) it happens to make. Now, back in England a hundred years ago they didn't have such laws to protect IP and Mr. Dickens suffered terrible financial distress despite writing one of the most popular works of his time and money that should have accrued to him went instead to those who stole his story and gave nothing back. The damages are those lost sales.

And that's the moral hole of piracy. They give nothing back. It takes time and effort to create something and they want to have it without giving in return. The common root of piracy and theft is taking something for nothing.

In all fairness, corporations exaggerate their losses beyond all logic and reason. Dicken's losses are easier to confirm; pirates had to pay for pirate copies at nearly the price a legitimate one would have fetched. Modern-day pirates pay nothing but the time and effort of downloading a copy. Sales are lost, but the cost of a copy is far less to the acquirer if it is pirated. So, I'd argue the true cost is the number of copies pirated, multiplied by the cost of pirating one copy, because it's unlikely many pirates would've bought the game in the first place if they couldn't pirate.

I do hope the government does take action here. The corporations need some kind of back-up; their only alternative is DRM and it is pure godawful and doesn't work to boot. Hopefully, this will put the screws to the pirates without every random innocent videogamer getting hit along the way.
You're talking about selling illegal copies. Which in practice is closer to the currently running "used game" racket than digital piracy. China, russia, and other second/third world countries being the few places were actual piracy is a profitable venture. Even then, prices aren't even close to comparable to what the first world demands. Meaning these places simply aren't viable markets.


You're also making the same assumption the document in question discredits. The idea that every downloaded copy is a lost sale. Pirates don't download one or two things, they download everything that interests them. As they are free from the constraints of their disposable income, they're exposed to more movies, games, television shows, than the average non-pirate. As "should I buy this... or pay my bills" never enters into the equation. Even asserting the average pirate would buy half of what they download is utterly delusional. But they do buy. Actual studies show pirates buy more than non-pirates. The logic works as well, they're exposed to more, they like more, they buy more. Faulty logic like, "why would they buy what they already have" doing little to discredit established trends. Pirates buy more than they would otherwise. Not even mentioning all the free advertising they produce. While cracked copies of asscreed2 were unplayable, the internet was almost totally silent on it. Then once the DRM was cracked interest had faded and no one talked about it. Also, if every pirated copy was a lost sale, and asscreed2 was unpiratable for a period, sales should've spiked. They didn't. Meaning ubisoft actually lost out on free advertising and buzz... because they protected their intellectual property.

Of course, if piracy were to suddenly end, pirates would actually buy less. Due to the current climate of "review creep" and marketing packages, pretty much every game/movie gets the same amount of press. Making it all but impossible to actually tell if something is good or not.

Also, I was refreshing my memory a bit to produce a real counter point to your Dicken's exmaple, but apparently it was an ass-pull. So no point, right?
 

dududf

New member
Aug 31, 2009
4,072
0
0
cmstewart87 said:
dududf said:
cmstewart87 said:
The borders bit was referring to the government trying to get others countries to have the same laws as they do in clarification. I don't give a damn if it's right or wrong in USA, but don't go trying to make everywhere else a mini USA. It's a different country for a reason.

And the picture is still valid.

Software piracy copies, it does not remove. Theft removes.
Ok I misunderstood the borders thing and in that sense I agree with you. and even if the picture is valid in your eyes its still wrong to do for anything other than having a backup.
*Raises hand*
Agree to disagreeing is awesome when it doesn't end in tears, fire, and corpses.
 

7ru7h

Avatar of The Laughing God
Jul 8, 2009
128
0
0
Cynical skeptic said:
Matt_LRR said:
There is one. Bootlegging.
Bootlegging is the act of creating illegal goods and then selling them. The "selling" being the key part of the term. A practice, when intellectual property is involved, no one can argue is harmless. Something the "used game" market is pretty damned close to.
How so? Because along with selling the illegal goods, you also need to create them. Places like Game Stop don't copy a disk for God of War 2 and then put that copy on the shelves while keeping the original in the back. If they did, that would be bootlegging, but they don't.

Honestly, I think game devs/publishers are just being stupid about the used game issue. Its not piracy, and its not illegal in the slightest (nor should it be). Why? Because of the first sale doctrine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine]. Basically, once I buy a legal copy of something, I'm allowed to sell it to whomever I choose, whenever I choose. Saying that Ubisoft deserves any of the money that I spend on a used copy of PoP for my Xbox is no different than saying the guy who originally built the house I want to buy deserves any of the money that the sellers are asking for the house.

I just can't wait to hear the reaction from the music industry when they find out you can get an old album at CD Warehouse and not pay them a dime...
 

shadow skill

New member
Oct 12, 2007
2,850
0
0
Therumancer said:
Reverend Del said:
I'm inclined to go with Sparrow on the subject of America nuking folks if they don't agree. Not going to happen. Nobody's that suicidal. And yes, even for America that would be suicide.

As for this new IP shenanigan. It'll be interesting to see, certainly. The most interesting will be just how hard they hit the pirates. Because stringent punishments could easily be a good deterrent to most casual pirates.
Well, the thing is that none of this really matters much in a purely domestic sense. The only thing that could come out of it would be a sexxy new set of police powers for the Federal goverment, and very little in the way of results. As an issue media piracy is small potatoes, the big issues are things like the piracy of drugs, clothing, and the like. Pfizers (which ran a major complex down here in Connecticut where I live, even if it's leaving) came up with this little drug called "Viagra" for example which cost them a lot to develop. China has been knocking it off and selling it around the world for a lot cheaper than Pfizers wants to charge, in violation of their patents, costing both them and our goverment a ridiculous amount of money. Likewise Chinese sweatshops churning out things like denim jeans and slapping labels for "Levis" or "Calvin Klein" on them is another big deal. The money from these sales isn't so much from the US Market, but the fact that they sell these things globally at rates that the creators can't compete with due to sweatshop labour, and no need for China to engage in the creative process, R&D, or financing involved.

The issue of "robber economies" (of which China is the biggest) has been an issue for a while now, it's not new, however nobody has wanted to do anything about it because it would require a war. The Democrats with ther agenda certainly are not going to throw the first punch at China and other nations, however they will most certainly going to be more than happy to use piracy as an excuse to try and get more extensive goverment powers to deal with the "crisis" while actually acheiving very little in the long run. Power is power in this case, and I can virtually guarantee we've got people rubbing their hands together in glee over the abillity to get around a lot of the current laws so they can in theory locate and arrest 15 year old music/movie/game pirates which in the end aren't going to amount to much in the overall intellectual properties arena. Loss of a lot of civil liberties, for very little in the way of meaningful results.

As far as a nuclear exchange goes, well right now the US has the abillity to destroy the entire world ten times over. We're also pretty much the only nation currently known to have an effective anti-missle defensive technique. You might remember Russia freaking out a few years ago about some of the interception systems we were showing off because they violated treaties with the USSR before it's collapse that Russia thought should still have been in force. Including the enviromental concerns (nuclear winter, etc...) if the entire world was to turn on the US (no allies) and we fired off our stockpile while they all launched at us, according to the last estimate I read years ago the odds of our long-term survivial as any kind of civilization would be a paltry 10%. Of course that's really good when you consider the odds of the rest of the world surviving are 0%. The defensive strategy here being shooting missles at other missles, including ones from our various subs, and also using planes to intercept them.

Now before you start screaming "American Power Trip" let me tell you that I don't think any of that matters much. The reason being is that we in the US don't currently have the guts to use our military to it's full potential, and the rest of the world knows this. You can have the most awesome gun in the world, and it doesn't matter if nobody believes you'll pull the trigger due to your own morality.

What's more I firmly believe ICBMs are rapidly going to be obselete. Still dangerous mind you, but nothing like they are now. Things like China's anti-satellite lasers (search China, satellite, lasers for more information)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/06/china_satellite_laser/

are rapidly getting to the point where satellite-based targeting, which ICBMs need to be effective, is goint to be impossible in a serious war. Add to this generally rising levels of technology, and it's only a matter of time before other nations get better at the missle interceptions we apparently freaked Russia with, and we're looking at another era of conventional warfare. There will be nothing preventing this anymore, as the peace brought by WMD insured MAD will end.

China is currently involved in building up a military force of unprecedented scale. Some of their weapons like the "Yuan" class submarine have proven themselves capable of "Tagging" American Carriers like "The Kitty Hawke", while old, such a thing was thought to be impossible (tagging meaning that to show off they proved they could have gotten a kill). China is generally not viewed as being an offensive military threat because they don't have the abillity to get their massive population/armies from point A to point B. They are however building the weapons to do this. There is nothing "defensive" about their preparations, and while the media hasn't exactly concealed it, you don't see much continuous coverage of such things, it's mentioned once or twice and then buried.... but it's out there.

Bassically China knows the conflict is inevitable, heck to be entirely honest from some things I've noticed over the years (translated speeches, periodicals, etc... I used to follow them somewhat) they basically have every intention of invading the rest of the world for living space if nothing else. They very much have an attitude of racial and cultural superiority, backed by a desire to avenge their trivialization by the west. Right or wrong in what they are saying, it's a very scary situation.

The bottom line here is that the method that has been ensuring global peace is failing, and it seems like a war is going to be inevitable, above and beyond anything said here.

I've had my eyes on this for years now, and it keeps getting worse. Also I believe that as far as the stated reasons go, in the end the next big war is going to be fought over trade and economics. Though China itself has other motives like wanting more land for it's exploding population to inhabit.
Their war machine would grind to a halt before they could establish enough of a hold on any territory long enough to get anything good from it. Their main problem has always been food, their badass army is going to be totally worthless in a conventional war with real countries when they all start starving to death. If they plan on pulling a land grab that pretty much rules out nuclear weapons, the only things left with a big enough punch are some form of relativistic missile (Also called Kinetic Strike.) or some type of directed energy weapons. Unless they have that they don't have a chance to win a shooting war at all (For the purposes of a land grab against the bigger powers.) and even if they did, that still does not suggest that they would be able to actually hold large amounts of territory.

Also for the record MAD is an old wives' tale that has not mattered since we figured out that radiation likes to linger on an area. It is a useless weapon for land grabs which is still one of the most basic reasons for war. The concept did work wonders for the weapons industry though. I also wonder how much of China's military buildup has more to do with keeping up appearances inside their own territory than any real plans for using them outside of their territory?

These people managed to institute a population control policy that worked so well that they ended up with a gross imbalance between men and women. It is a recipe for rebellion waiting to happen. The hardliners who run China at the moment know that they really can't stop the erosion of their power base from happening since internet filtering is just never going to work, they know that they have to expose themselves to the rest of the world in order to be able to steal anything, all the rest of us have to do is wait for the current authority to crumble from the inside out. The fact that they are a robber economy is one of their biggest weaknesses, if they throw the first punch that IP is not going to flow nearly as freely as it did before which would of course mean that they would have to invest in their own R&D which is going to take away money from the war machine. I really think that the most we will see in the conflict with China is war through much smaller proxies. At least as long as food remains a problem.
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
dududf said:
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said at a Washington D.C. press conference announcing the strategy. "Clean and simple. It's smash and grab. It ain't no different than smashing a window at Tiffany's and grabbing [merchandise]."

Get it right people. There's a difference.

Anyone else tired of the US trying to make everyone else in the world like the US? Because it's getting kinda annoying.

Funny thing here America. If China and England called in their debts on you Right Now There wouldn't be an America anymore. Just something to think about when you try pushing everyone else around.

I don't care what you do in your own borders, but it stops at the border.
First of all, there is a very simple explanation for what Biden said: He'd an idiot.

Secondly, if America was called on all of their debts right now, they wouldn't pay, they wouldn't just disband, it'd be messy, but I'm sure the country would continue to exist.

Lastly, I don't totally agree that it stops at our border, after all, it was something made in the US that was "stolen" and these illegal websites do allow people from the US to use their services.(for the record, I don't have a problem with "piracy" but I don't agree with this assertion)
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
Ewyx said:
IP laws are fucked. However, they're skewed toward powerful corporations, and not in the interest of the public and creativity. Go figure.

10 years. After that it should be public domain, if you can't make a profit in 10 years. You're obviously doing something horribly wrong.
I like this idea, I really like it.

Any game or movie or ebook or song or whatever should be public domain after 10 years.
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
Sparrow said:
As much as I liked the article, I must admit that there were a few parts I just didn't get. Alright, you caught me, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.

HG131 said:
Tom Roberts said:
I'm wondering just how evenhandedly those rules on copyright infringement/IP theft will be applied.

China is certainly one of the main offenders but can you honestly see America going "I'm sorry, but until you sort out these legal issues to our satisfaction we won't be engaging in Trade with you."

When the obvious response by the Chinese is then "OK, since it doesn't really affect us anymore if your economy goes through the porcelain bowl, we'd like our usual trade deficit to be paid in the form of all those loans. Dongyi."

Basically I figure the old adage of 'At your feet or at your throat' will apply.
We'd respond "Ok, your payment is coming in the form of our 10s of thousands of nukes coming at your country. Good bye."
I'm not sure whether your talking for China or America here, but nobody is that stupid.

"They won't trade with us? Nuke them. That'll fix the problem, obviously."
Don't you know? Nukes fix everything

Anyway, China is actually quite heavily invested in the success of our economy, after all, if the economy collapses and our dollar becomes worth the same as say, a peso, then when China is paid their debt, it'll be worth about 1% of what it would have been due to the hyperinflation.
 

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
0
0
Matt_LRR said:
You, as a user, are allowed to:

1. make backup copies.
2. time shift
3. format shift
4. etc.

Oh, unless the content distributor locked it.

They came *so* close to actually passing meaningful reforms, and then took it all away in favour of corporate interest.

-m
I'd like to take a closer look at the bill in a future column, I'm just not sure that something so specific to Canada would wash. Worth looking into a bit, I suppose.

ESAC (I think it was) tweeted once or twice a couple of weeks ago, extolling the virtues of C-32 because it codified all these admittedly excellent consumer rights. But it made no mention of the digital lock provision. When I asked about it, I was told that specifics were available in the actual legislation and I should look there for details - in other words, I was blown off. It's a great sales pitch, I suppose, but I wonder how many people who think it's about time we did something like this aware of just how likely it is that they'll soon be breaking a law or two.

Is it the result of US pressure? It may sound paranoid to suggest it, but I don't think it necessarily is.
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
dududf said:
Kanodin0 said:
dududf said:
Kanodin0 said:
I hit enter and posted prematurely.
...
That can be taken out of context far too easily.

I edit my posts a lot some times as I post before I'm done saying what I intended to say. I blame the ' key being next to enter.
Fair enough. As to your expanded point I partially agree, the U.S. does attempt to order other countries too often. However I don't see any real problem on imposing trade restrictions on countries that won't go along with copyrights, it's not a direct order so much as fair leveraging.
"Don't agree with our rules, or we'll remove one of your largest sources of income, and remove the jobs of millions of people"

Seems like bullying to me.
If other countries want to steal things from each-other in their borders that's fine, but since they are stealing from the US when they host websites that allow for pirating of US made media, they are committing a crime against the US (all arguments whether piracy is a crime aside, considering that our government considers it a crime, they shouldn't be allowed to do it to us)
 

dududf

New member
Aug 31, 2009
4,072
0
0
danpascooch said:
I'm complaining about America trying to make the world fit it's own image. It bugs the living crap out of me.

Also didn't you see my edit? Unless you've had that quoted for around 2 hours, you should've saw it.
dududf said:
*Edit
Can people stop quoting me? It's getting seriously annoying I get that "New Message" icon every 5 minutes. Besides almost everything in reply has been said/spoken already.
I get it, you disagree that's nice (is my feeling to the people who quote with me). What you say won't change what a think. All it's doing is spamming my inbox. (this is not directed specifically at you, but people who've just generally quoted me.)
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
dududf said:
danpascooch said:
I'm complaining about America trying to make the world fit it's own image. It bugs the living crap out of me.

Also didn't you see my edit? Unless you've had that quoted for around 2 hours, you should've saw it.
dududf said:
*Edit
Can people stop quoting me? It's getting seriously annoying I get that "New Message" icon every 5 minutes. Besides almost everything in reply has been said/spoken already.
I get it, you disagree that's nice (is my feeling to the people who quote with me). What you say won't change what a think. All it's doing is spamming my inbox. (this is not directed specifically at you, but people who've just generally quoted me.)
I saw the edit, but when I disagree with someone, I quote them, sorry, but that's forum practice, if it bothers you to the point where you wish you weren't quoted may I recommend simply deleting the quote alerts from this thread without reading them? Because if I want to make a point based on someones post, I'm going to quote them.

I don't really feel that this is a "make everyone like us" type thing, it's more of a "stop stealing from us" thing. It used to be quite simple, if you're physically in our borders, you'll follow our rules, but with the internet, you can commit a whole number of crimes in other countries without ever setting foot in them.

For example, let's say there was some tiny country where theft was perfectly legal, if I went there, set up a laptop, and somehow found a way to hack into electronic banking websites and steal billions and billions of dollars from thousands of Canadians, should Canada look the other way because I was in another country? I don't personally think Piracy is wrong, but I also believe that America should be allowed to protect itself from people committing crimes AGAINST THEM from other countries. It's one thing to commit a crime outside of the US that does not affect the US, but granted the US government considers piracy theft, they aren't going about their own business in their own country, they're stealing from us, and the US has every right to protect itself from theft.

You may be in another country, but the US shouldn't have to stand by while things are stolen from them, and they won't
 

dududf

New member
Aug 31, 2009
4,072
0
0
danpascooch said:
dududf said:
danpascooch said:
I'm complaining about America trying to make the world fit it's own image. It bugs the living crap out of me.

Also didn't you see my edit? Unless you've had that quoted for around 2 hours, you should've saw it.
dududf said:
*Edit
Can people stop quoting me? It's getting seriously annoying I get that "New Message" icon every 5 minutes. Besides almost everything in reply has been said/spoken already.
I get it, you disagree that's nice (is my feeling to the people who quote with me). What you say won't change what a think. All it's doing is spamming my inbox. (this is not directed specifically at you, but people who've just generally quoted me.)
I saw the edit, but when I disagree with someone, I quote them, sorry, but that's forum practice, if it bothers you to the point where you wish you weren't quoted may I recommend simply deleting the quote alerts from this thread without reading them? Because if I want to make a point based on someones post, I'm going to quote them.

I don't really feel that this is a "make everyone like us" type thing, it's more of a "stop stealing from us" thing. It used to be quite simple, if you're physically in our borders, you'll follow our rules, but with the internet, you can commit a whole number of crimes in other countries without ever setting foot in them.

For example, let's say there was some tiny country where theft was perfectly legal, if I went there, set up a laptop, and somehow found a way to hack into electronic banking websites and steal billions and billions of dollars from thousands of Canadians, should Canada look the other way because I was in another country? I don't personally think Piracy is wrong, but I also believe that America should be allowed to protect itself from people committing crimes AGAINST THEM from other countries. It's one thing to commit a crime outside of the US that does not affect the US, but granted the US government considers piracy theft, they aren't going about their own business in their own country, they're stealing from us, and the US has every right to protect itself from theft.

You may be in another country, but the US shouldn't have to stand by while things are stolen from them, and they won't
My annoyance with the American-Assimilation-Thing (over dramatization...yummm) is not related to piracy.

I'm too tired to source every single thing I've seen, but it's a cummulative annoyance, over a wide variety of topics not just IP protection. I look at this and think "Oh joy another thing on the list, fuck off would yeah."

It's just getting annoying, especially as my government lacks any backbone when it comes to relations with the US, and does everything the US whims.
 

Matt_LRR

Unequivocal Fan Favorite
Nov 30, 2009
1,260
0
0
Andy Chalk said:
Matt_LRR said:
You, as a user, are allowed to:

1. make backup copies.
2. time shift
3. format shift
4. etc.

Oh, unless the content distributor locked it.

They came *so* close to actually passing meaningful reforms, and then took it all away in favour of corporate interest.

-m
I'd like to take a closer look at the bill in a future column, I'm just not sure that something so specific to Canada would wash. Worth looking into a bit, I suppose.

ESAC (I think it was) tweeted once or twice a couple of weeks ago, extolling the virtues of C-32 because it codified all these admittedly excellent consumer rights. But it made no mention of the digital lock provision. When I asked about it, I was told that specifics were available in the actual legislation and I should look there for details - in other words, I was blown off. It's a great sales pitch, I suppose, but I wonder how many people who think it's about time we did something like this aware of just how likely it is that they'll soon be breaking a law or two.

Is it the result of US pressure? It may sound paranoid to suggest it, but I don't think it necessarily is.
Almost certainly it is a result of pressure from down south. If not political, commercial.

I've actually read much of the bill, and I support almost all of it. It's a very future-minded progressive document.

The catch is, it's not "a provision" regarding digital locks, it's actually a clause in the granting of every individual right.

As in, "you have the right to time shift recorded media as broadcast on TV, unless the broadcaster includes a digital lock on the broadcast to prevent you recording it" or "you have the right to convert a CD to MP3 for playback in your computer or MP3 player, unless the CD includes encryption to prevent the content being ripped"

each individual provision of a right has that caveat included.

It's really unfortunate. there's so much good in it. The document actually spells out parody and satire provisions as a protected use of copyrighted material, something we've not had before and desperately needed. (and which is pretty relevant to me as a Canadian comedy content creator). I'd really like to support it's passing, but I just can't abide that level of corporate pandering. It's nuts. If they think for one second that every single publisher and distributor releasing product in Canada isn't immediately going to add digital locks to everything they need to give their heads a shake.

I actually considered writing a piece about this to submit myself a few weeks back, but as you said, being so canada-specific, who knows if it'd wash.

Maybe it wouldn't hurt to add a Can-Con column though... :3

-m