Home » Policy

ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement)

The dishonestly labelled Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement which is really an Internet, copyright and patent trade agreement.

Geist is running his playbook again?

I added the following as a comment to a blog article by Chris Castle which he titled, "The Consultation of the Mikado Part 2: Geist is running his playbook again ". It is also interesting to ask why the same isn't lobbed against musician and MP Charlie Angus who, along with myself, share many policy views with Michael Geist. Maybe it is seen to be easier to pick on a lawyer than fellow artists?

Podcast #35: The iTax & Fair Dealing

Jesse Brown interviewed Charlie Angus about his private copying regime private members bill and fair use motion.

US walks out on talks

From today's Globe and Mail.

“Significant international discussions on Arctic issues should include those who have legitimate interests in the region,” the U.S. Secretary of State said.


Ms. Clinton apparently believed strongly enough, that all parties with vested interests should be included in the discussion, that she did not come to the conference.

DFAIT un-response to ACTA submission

I received the following response from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade to my submission to the ACTA consultation.

I find it frustrating that they continue to try to misdirect critiques with a suggestion that it is premature to speculate about any specific measure. My critique is primarily based on the lack of disclosure as well as the merging of entirely unrelated areas of policy (Counterfeiting, "piracy"/de-minimus infringement, Internet/etc issues). These problems were only confirmed by the response, something that is definitely not reassuring.

Don’t Blame Google

In an article for The Mark I suggest that we shouldn't blame Google when music blogs are shut down, since it’s the major record labels that are to blame.

Google, China, Hillary Clinton and the filtered Internet

By now you will have read many articles derived from the statements made by David Drummond, SVP, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer at Google about China.

The primary issue that Google was bringing up was a simple and not politically hot one. Companies need to know that the government of countries they are trying to do business in will have laws and enforce them against those who attack the physical or virtual infrastructure of these businesses.

Many of the comments and articles about this incident suggested Google was trying to protect online free speech. I do not buy that argument in this case.

Read full article on IT World Canada's blog ...

Answers needed on secret ACTA talks.

Charlie Angus has sent a letter to International Trade Minister Peter Van Loan challenging him to explain how ACTA will impact Canada's domestic copyright policy. Full text of letter is on Charlie's website.

Submission to the ongoing ACTA consultation by DFAIT

The following is my submission to the ongoing consultation by Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, on the so-called Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).

Available in HTML, OpenDocument and PDF formats

Artists' lawsuit: major record labels are the real pirates

Interesting article by Jacqui Cheng in Ars Technica, reporting on an article by Michael Geist, about seemingly confirmed allegations of massive infringement by the major labels.

I think we should count out loud "one, two, three" for each CRIA member and ask why they are allowed to have an Internet connection. They are proponents of a "three strikes" rule, and such a rule should be applied to them first!

Word manipulation, hypocrisy, and the so-called Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

ACTA represents an attempt by a few businesses using outdated business methods to try to find a way around Clayton Christensen's The Innovator's Dilemma. They are doing this by lobbying for rules which will protect their existing business methods against emerging businesses which might transform the economy and replace the old ways of doing things. In their lobbying they are manipulating language to suggest what they are asking for is very different than what they are actually asking for, and they are trying to suggest that activities are devastating and must be stopped if someone else does something which the companies the lobbiests represent commonly do themselves.

>> Read full article on IT World Canada's blog.

Syndicate content