Re: [d@DCC] Movie copyright duration

From: Russell McOrmond <russell _-at-_ flora.ca>
To: "General Copyright Discussions \(questions, organizing, etc\)" <discuss (at) list.digital-copyright.ca>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:04:18 -0400
References: <95f3e595ed4b.95ed4b95f3e5@ncf.ca>

Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> Au contraire! It's seen as a priority! Just a low one. It's in 
> the "long-term" list of issues.

   Yes, "clarification and simplification" of the act itself is listed 
as the last item on the lowest priority.  One might like to assume this 
includes clarification/simplification of copyright term, but I'm not 
convinced.


> See copyrightwatch.ca for yet another example of how even the 
> government can't understand its own copyright laws.

http://copyrightwatch.ca/

   Great that it is being discussed that even after we managed to avoid 
that copyright extension that the documentation for the bill claims that 
the extension still happened.

-- 
  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