Digital Copyright Canada

I received some phone calls from the Liberal party the last few days, asking that I spread the word in support of their party. I have voted for their candidate in Ottawa South the past few elections, and already did so in the advanced polls on Friday. I have said before that I vote for the candidate despite the party, not because of it. I’m not a fan of any of the parties who have seats in the house of Commons.

Nestor E. Arellano included an interview with me in his coverage of the patent case between Toronto's i4i and Microsoft.

“It would be very easy for me to wave the open source banner and yell ‘down with Microsoft’ or wrap myself in the Canadian flag and cheer 'yeah for i4i.' But it’s far better to support what’s right than be concerned with who or the brands that are involved,” he added.

I'm really liking this Vote Mob thing, and hope it will increase voter turnout. I also hope we all check these videos out before someone sends a take-down (This is Canuckistan, and we don't have a living Fair Use regime).

There are many videos out there, and many can be seen at Leadnow.ca. I chose one from Carleton University, the University I attended back in the late 80's and early 90's.

Reading message from the Kitchener-Waterloo Linux Users Group, I'm learning that non-owner locks protected by the Conservatives in C-32 is turning out to be an election issue.

A video of a debate included discussion of the massive transition costs that C-32 would put on people wanting to adopt RIM's Playbook (The "Playbook tax"), and the incumbent defending the bill. Mr Braid repeated his misunderstanding of the effect of non-owner digital locks, demonstrating that being on the committee and hearing from experts didn't help him in understanding this technology.

Michael Geist weighs in on issue with: Digital Locks Emerge As Election Issue in Battleground Riding.

Drew Wilson has been posting some reviews of party platforms on digital issues: Conservative, Liberal, Bloc, NDP, Green, and Pirate Party.

I was interviewed for an article by Mike Vardy that discusses barriers in Canada to content and technology. While referencing the comparative strength of US and Canadian law (Hint: US is more lax), I also referenced current CANCON rules.

“I think everybody sits around and complains but no one figures out why,” suggests McOrmond, who is based in the nation’s capital. “The problems are coming from inside Canada. We are actively refusing content. CanCon rules should not apply to retail. Why should CanCon rules apply to Netflix but not to WalMart? It’s these silly rules.”

Of the 12 members of the C-32 committee, six of them were from the Conservative party of Canada. This included chair Gordon Brown (Leeds—Grenville, ON). Three members were there for almost all meetings: Mike Lake (Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB), Dean Del Mastro (Peterborough, ON), and Peter Braid (Kitchener—Waterloo, ON). While the other members included Sylvie Boucher ( Beauport—Limoilou, QC) and Kelly Block (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Sask) when the committee was formed, they were substituted with other Conservative members including Ed Fast (Abbotsford, BC) who became very active, Hon. Maxime Bernier (Beauce, QC) who became acting chair at one point, as well as Brent Rathgeber (Edmonton—St. Albert, AB), Daryl Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings, ON), Hon. Michael D. Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills, ON), Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, AB), Mike Wallace (Burlington, ON) and Paul Calandra (Oak Ridges—Markham, ON).

The fake iPod Tax issue being brought up by the Conservatives isn't the only way that Copyright is showing up in the campaign. Seems that yet another one of their campaign advertisements infringes copyright.

So, as we go after the so-called "wealth destroyers" the Conservatives liked to claim that C-32 targeted, does that include the Conservative Party itself?

This is not a uniquely Conservative issue, as Michael Geist has asked whether Liberal MP Dan McTeague is a repeat Copyright infringer?

The common thread is that some politicians and parties are pushing for copyright to be treated as if it were a "law and order" issue needing immediate attention to stop scofflaws. These same persons seem to often find themselves on the wrong side of these same laws.

Elections Canada announced the deregistration of this political party. I've removed it from our list.

The Conservative Party has launched an embarrassingly inaccurate campaign website focused on the private copying regime at ipodtax.ca. The reality is quite different given the Conservatives tabled legislation that would have increased the existing levy (which the campaign calls a "tax"). It is the Liberals proposing getting rid of the levy.

While it is true the Conservatives weren't proposing an expansion of the levy to devices, it is inaccurate to suggest they are greater opponents of the music levy than the Liberals.

I'm not sure why the Conservatives continue to highlight a policy area where their primary political opponents -- the Liberals -- have offered a better alternative. I'm not a partisan supporter of either of these parties as anyone reading this blog would know, but it bothers me when such misinformation is abused in a political campaign.

See also: Is the private copying levy a tax?