Read: [next] [previous] message
Re: [d@DCC] Mr. Angus in the House.
From: Russell McOrmond <russell _-at-_ flora.ca>
Robert Smits wrote: > That's true, because there are always "more important" issues for each of the > parties than copyright. The "more important" issues will vary from party to > party, and will vary based on how many votes each party thinks it can gain or > lose with the particular policy. I don't know if it is just me, but how candidates think about copyright is an indicator of their general understanding and viewpoints towards ongoing and fairly radical changes in the economy. It tells me whether they are a hander-on to the old industrial economy (neo-luddites?), or whether they are interested in allowing (or even encouraging) humanity to move forward. I find that if I agree with someone on copyright related things, I am far more likely to agree with (or at least respect) their views on other policy issues as well as they are at least coming from a compatible mindset as to where we are in history. I also see this debate as incumbents vs. innovators, but far larger than just in an economic sense: we are talking about incumbent political philosophy vs. futurists. > I haven' seen the blog, but I've been reviewing testimony before the Heritage > Committee and the way that Danielle Bouvet (Director, Copyright Policy > Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage) and the Minister, Bev Oda declined > to answer questions on fair use, on DRM, etc make me suspicious. Remember that Danielle Bouvet is a bureaucrat with a government department, not someone who has party-based partisan views. Ms. Oda declining to answer questions is also part of what all Ministers have always done. The only reason we haven't seen federal Bloc and NDP ministers refusing to answer basic questions is because they have not formed the government (and in the case of the Bloc, are incapable of ever doing so). Probably one of the moments where I understood the non-partisan nature of Copyright was while being in the audience for a November 24, 2004, meeting of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage (CHPC). In this case it was a Liberal MP asking a question of the then Liberal Minister of Heritage, and getting an answer that had absolutely nothing to do with the question. Letter to Scott Simms in reply to copyright questions from committee meeting http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/582 ---cut--- Mr. Scott Simms: I have a ten-year-old son who is able to get about a hundred songs by going click-click. You talk about protecting the artists, but it's a delicate balance here. We have thousands, if not millions, of people out there breaking the law, and unseemingly. I won't say all of them are completely innocent, but there's a lot of innocence out there. How are we going to deal with this? What stage are we at right now with the industry department? We do have free downloading, so how can we protect the artist while at the same time trying to be sensible? We're seeing examples in the United States where it's approaching the ludicrous. We're arresting young children for doing something they're unaware of. Are we going in that direction? Where are we at this stage? Hon. Liza Frulla: First of all, we'll answer that with the copyright law. We want to assess that within the copyright bill, to start off with. The industry association is talking about $425 million that they are losing due to des tÚlÚchargements. Of course, it is a complex issue that we will have to address when we look at the copyright bill, absolutely. Mr. Scott Simms: When will that be? Do you have a timeline? Hon. Liza Frulla: As I said, we are writing the bill now with the industry department. You'll have the vote. You're talking about equilibrium. You'll have the vote opinion, and that's why we have to put our differences aside. We are writing the bill now. Our schedule is to present it to members of cabinet before Christmas, and we're really trying hard. That means that if everything goes well, you'll be able to look at and study the bill next session. [Translation] Mr. Scott Simms: Thank you. That's it for me. ---cut--- I also like to note that Sarmite Sam Bulte walked over and whispered something into Mr. Simms ear. I suspect that what she said is why Mr. Simms has not yet ever replied to anyone in our community about what was said, and why it is that he allowed the Minister to completely sidetrack his question. I even wrote letters during the election, and didn't hear anything back: http://www.digital-copyright.ca/edid/10002 If anyone knows constituents in the riding of Bonavista--Gander--Grand Falls--Windsor (Newfoundland and Labrador), it would be very helpful. Here is a map! http://www.elections.ca/scripts/pss/Map.aspx?L=e&ED=10002&EV=99&EV_TYPE=6&PC=&Prov=NL&ProvID=10&MapID=&QID=-1&PageID=27&TPageID= > Perhaps not, but it's the very industries that are in favour of most of the > stuff we oppose that have been giving her money. The same industries have given money to anyone who was likely to become the Heritage Minister, so this is also not a partisan issue. During the last election they were hedging their bets, with mildly different incumbent intermediary groups funding Oda and Bulte. Mr. Angus is unusually immune to being bought off by these same folks because he has personal experience as an independent creator in Canada. Most MPs lack that type of experience, and in the case of Oda come from a broadcaster (intermediary) perspective. Whenever you hear the word "independent" you should always ask, "independent of what"? The answer is: independent of the incumbent intermediaries, which is the community Oda comes from and who financially support her. I'm an independent creator, and I donated to Mr. Angus's campaign as I wanted to ensure that "one of us" made it into the house. It wasn't relevant to me which political party he was from. Is that situation all that different? I'm glad it looks bad to the general public to have Ms. Oda receiving money from the very people she is mandated to be regulating, but the entire Department of Canadian Heritage is in the same form of regulatory capture. Heritage Canada funds many arts groups, but these are largely groups with the incumbent way of thinking of the creation, distribution and funding of creativity. Those who are truly part of new-media using zero marginal cost methods of production, distribution and funding tend not to receive any of this money from Heritage. Heritage is naturally going to be more helpful to those very groups that they interact with on a daily basis, and be largely oblivious (or consider to be competition, and thus something to stifle) innovators. The same thing can be said about parts of Industry Canada with the telecom industry, but Industry is a much broader department with everything from telecommunications regulation to the Competition Bureau, ICT branch, e-Commerce Branch, and Consumer Affairs. They even have (gasp) economists working for the department, some of who are very forward thinking people. This diversity is why the copyright policy views we see from Industry Canada seem to themselves be far more balanced than what we see coming out of Heritage Canada. >> I'm curious if you watched Even Moglen's talk. Extremely >> inspirational on the importance of moving away from marginal-cost based >> business models for creativity. It is this broader new-economy >> economic, social justice, globalist, etc approach that inspires me to do >> the volunteer policy work I do. http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/2813 > > No. I've heard of him but that's it. Please listen to the talk. It is very inspirational. Even if you aren't a supporter of Free Software he puts much of the work we are doing here in a larger historical and global context. The video is on both YouTube and Archive.org. You might even want to download it and make copies on CDs to give to people. For a more narrow talk on the background of a future Free Software license upgrade, check out: FLOSS Weekly 13: Eben Moglen on GPL 3.0 http://www.twit.tv/floss13 >> The important thing to remember is that it is individuals that make >> this difference, and that there isn't party policy from any of the >> parties with seats that speak to this issue better than others. This >> may change over time if the grassroots of the parties push, but thus far >> I haven't seen this change. > > Not yet. Mind if we get partisan for a moment? As someone associated with the NDP, how do you see the party able to move forward on post-industrial economic policy when the party was formed partly with a merger with interests of the industrial-era labour movement? The other parties don't have as strong tie with something that is unique to the Industrial era. What strategies do you think will need to be deployed within the NDP to move forward? Are there social justice values from the labour movement that can be extracted from the industrial-era ties that movement has, and allow these structures to look past their historical reason for being? Much of the industrial era struggle over the means of production and distribution are changing as we move to an "information" economy where we have production, distribution and access. Many of the centralized control issues are solved by embracing and harnessing the zero marginal cost of knowledge. This zero marginal cost is seen as the greatest threat to these groups such as the "Writers Union" and the majority of other creator groups with strong labour movement ties. >> It would be interesting if there were petitions signed that weren't >> about what riding someone was in, but were collected at party events and >> were tabled by a party MP as "being from members of our party from >> across Canada". > > That's more difficult to organize, but may be doable. Is it? Which part? Finding an MP to speak to the issue when they table the signatures, or keeping signatures sorted such that a batch can be known to be from members of a specific party? Or is the issue talking about policy at party events (constituency association meetings, policy conferences, etc)? Why would policy be hard to discuss at party functions? (I don't just mean any specific party, but parties in general. Although I think the NDP will have an easier time as far as having an ally who is currently in the house.) -- Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition! http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/ict/ "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or portable media player from my cold dead hands!" _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@list.digital-copyright.ca http://list.digital-copyright.ca/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Read: [next] [previous] message
List: [newer] [older] articles
You need to subscribe to post to this forum.