Re: [d@DCC] Bill C-59 currently being "debated"

From: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin _-at-_ linuxmail.org>
To: "General Copyright Discussions \(questions, organizing, \ etc\)" <discuss (at) list.digital-copyright.ca>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:38:24 -0400
References: <4670490C.4030902@flora.ca> <46706448.30002@flora.ca> <467076F0.2030605@reamined.on.ca> <46707A12.8060603@flora.ca> <467080C7.4020905@linuxmail.org> <2241.142.150.148.227.1181780207.squirrel@mail.vcn.bc.ca> <46709863.4030705@flora.ca>

I agree, Forward work on this key.

joseph

Russell McOrmond wrote:
> mgurst@vcn.bc.ca wrote:
> 
>>I have no idea what here position would be on this but I've dealt with Pat
>>Carney in the past and she understands tech issues, is very very business
>>savvy and a real west coast independent maverick thinker and straight
>>shooter.
> 
> 
>    Any chance you could contact her?  Prior to the government tabling a 
> bill implementing anti-circumvention it may be possible for the Senate 
> to launch a study into the effectiveness and issues surrounding such 
> legislation.
> 
>    If we can just get the 4-owners relevant to anti-circumvention onto 
> parliament's radar, then we may have a chance.  Out of the 4 relevant 
> owners (copyright holder, owner of media, software author, owner of 
> hardware), anti-circumvention only alleges (unproven) to help the 
> interests of a small subset of copyright holders while greatly harming 
> the interests of the other 3 groups (as well as some copyright holders).
> 
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@list.digital-copyright.ca
http://list.digital-copyright.ca/mailman/listinfo/discuss