tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21869981723973088672024-02-08T10:24:45.976-07:00No longer dormantA personal blog about following and fighting for digital issues in the Edmonton region.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-9512393541293699812011-10-19T20:34:00.004-06:002011-10-19T20:52:37.469-06:00Fair Copyright for Canada: Alberta Chapter?The plan to mass message the Edmonton and Calgary chapters through facebook did not go as planned. Facebook for some reason would not send the mass message so it appears the Alberta chapter will remain a dream. I guess the chapters will not be in shape to fight the good fight this time. I will instead comment on the debates that interest me most.<br /><br />On <a href="http://parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Pub=hansard&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=1#SOB-4376742"> day one</a> It was interesting to see Mike Lake speak.<br /><blockquote> Mr. Speaker, I will come back quickly to the conversation around long distance education. It is important to note that the hon. member repeatedly referred to the taking away of rights. Of course, nothing would be taken away. Benefits are being added. Additional opportunities are being added, through this legislation, that simply are not there right now. <a name="Para2509383"></a><p> </p><div> We had to strike a balance between creators and the users of the content, and we think we have struck that balance. If we look at the 39 hours of testimony, so far, at the committee stage, we see witness after witness speak to the balance that we have struck with this legislation.</div></blockquote><br /><br />I wish I could have met the guy so I could at least try and show how this bill is not balanced even if it would have been futile.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-75168980898262375492011-09-19T18:26:00.004-06:002011-09-19T18:57:53.092-06:00Dark day for CanadaIt is a sad day to be a Canadian. The <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=hurt+locker">infamous</a> Hurt Locker lawsuits found their way to <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6012/135/">Canada</a>. The pay up or we sue scheme is here.<br /><br />I still hate myself for buying that DVD. I will try to not make that <a href="http://www.imdb.com/company/co0179337/">mistake</a> again.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-60684391771280314322011-09-14T17:19:00.005-06:002011-09-14T22:18:36.052-06:00Ground hog day<a style="font-family: courier new;" href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110913/03331815927/canada-plans-to-re-introduce-bad-copyright-plan-with-damaging-digital-locks-provisions-with-no-additional-consultation.shtml">New bill</a>,<span style="font-family:courier new;"> old shit. After many years I figure I am allowed to be a little cranky. Here is a rough draft for the letter.</span><br /><br />I have now lost count on how many copyright bills have come and gone. I could go though the same old (but true) arguments that point out the pitfalls of digital locks but it would end up being a cut and paste affair like the plan to reintroduce bill C-32. I will instead point out what is new which is the hard evidence on how un-Canadian the bill the conservative government plans to reintroduce is.<br /><br /><blockquote>Senior Canadian officials have privately told the Embassy that the federal government plans to hold public consultations on potential copyright legislation this summer. The government hopes to introduce a new copyright bill in the fall of 2009. Industry representatives are concerned that the government is dragging its feet on copyright reform and are calling for the USG to elevate Canada to the Special 301 Priority Watch List.</blockquote><blockquote>Addington said the Government had been accused, unfairly in her opinion, of drafting C 61 without public consultation. Therefore, the Government plans to hold public consultations on copyright policy over the summer. The exact form of these consultations has not been determined. Addington stated that the GOC would also use these consultations as an opportunity to educate consumers and "sell" the Government view. These consultations will likely be announced in May or June, she said.</blockquote> <br /> Thanks to WikiLeaks the “made in Canada” bill is definitively shown to not be made for Canadians but for U.S. interests in sections. I am looking for a bill that reflects Canadians ideals which brings me to my question for members of parliament.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">Why is bill C-32 being reintroduced as is and not changed to reflect what was learn during committee? What is the point of the committee if it is not to improve upon the bill or future bills?</span><br /><br />Thanks for reading.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-54112888628511848012011-04-28T20:48:00.004-06:002011-04-28T21:00:23.130-06:00Wikileaks Cable Confirms Public Pressure Forced Delay of Canadian Copyright Bill in 2008<blockquote>From December 2007 to mid-February, senior GOC officials and well-informed private sector contacts assured the Embassy that legislative calendar concerns were delaying the copyright bill's introduction into Parliament. Our contacts downplayed the small - but increasingly vocal - public opposition to copyright reform led by University of Ottawa law professor Dr. Michael Geist. On February 25, however, Industry Minister Prentice (please protect) admitted to the Ambassador that some Cabinet members and Conservative Members of Parliament - including MPs who won their ridings by slim margins - opposed tabling the copyright bill now because it might be used against them in the next federal election. Prentice said the copyright bill had become a "political" issue. He also indicated that elevating Canada to the Special 301 Priority Watch List would make the issue more difficult and would not be received well.<br /></blockquote><blockquote><br />(Comment: James Rajotte - chair of the Industry Committee, which would likely receive a copyright bill - told the Ambassador on February 28 that the legislation would not have such smooth sailing. End Comment)</blockquote><br />"Why don't you do something about it?" I did and I had an <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5763/125/">effect</a>.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-85031513585635324002010-07-02T10:26:00.004-06:002010-07-02T11:04:32.263-06:00GoalThe first thing I always need to remind my self before I start a letter is think about what the goal of my letter should be. When it comes to a online consultation my goal is to mention as many things in as short of time as possible because who would really pay attention to a 10 page essay on digital locks in that setting anyways. When it comes to writing a letter to a MP my goal is to not look like a "radical extremist" and to convince the MP that I would be worth while in a meeting.<br /><br />I think the fact I don't come off as a professional writer actually works out in my favor. Not being in the intellectual property field or information technology field gives me a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber">Joe the plumber</a> edge I try and use as much as possible.<br /><br />Here is my rough draft. Once again feel free to point out typos.<br /><br /> <blockquote>Back in December of 2007 I only became active in copyright for one reason and one reason only. Digital locks are able lock people away from their own property. Amazon proved that point by having kindles remove, ironically, George Orwell's 1984. <br /><br /> Digital locks have had a long history when it comes to computers. Digital locks have compromised computers, invaded privacy, and left consumers with unplayable content. There are many instance where people have had to remove digital locks because of these problems. To me it has become clear that digital locks themselves and the tools that break them should not be legally protected. Bill C-32 protection of digital locks only exacerbates the problem of abusive digital locks.<br /><br /> Bill C-32's protection of digital locks also adds some more problems to the mix. With a few extra lines of computer code it can prevent a person from exercising their fair dealing rights. For example there is a exemption for backing up under C-32 that gets hamstrung because people cannot break a digital lock without the risk of statutory damages. The result is people are still not allow to backup their favorite DVD.<br /><br /> I could go on with talk about examples of how Bill C-32 will hurt industries and consumers by using examples from the United States but I feel I would be able to do so better in a meeting so instead I would like to talk about the good in Bill C-32.<br /><br /> The separation between non-commercial statutory damages and commercial statutory damages is a important division. This will prevent ridiculous statutory damages awards as seen in the United States with the Jammie Thomas trial. What is missing however is separating commercial statutory damages from non-commercial statutory damages when it comes to circumventing digital locks.<br /><br /> The technology neutral approach taken with Bill C-32 is a vast improvement over naming VHS and CDs by name. This improvement allows the bill to be more applicable in the future when new technology comes.<br /><br /> Allowing non-commercial user generated content is a important part of Bill C-32. This combined with the notice of claimed infringement system will prevent frivolous DMCA takedowns as often seen in the United States. <br /><br /> The expansion of fair dealing to include education, parody, and satire is a great step forward to creating a balance between creators and consumers. What is missing again is the fact digital locks are able to prevent these exceptions and by doing so throw off the balance between creators and consumers.<br /><br /> I am pleased to see that there was no attempt to extend copyright term lengths however I would have liked to see them shortened.<br /><br /> Overall Bill C-32 is a well written bill except when it comes to digital locks where no concessions have been made. I am looking forward to the committee process where hopefully the problem of digital locks being able to override most exemptions will be fixed.</blockquote>Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-3336799765086683352010-06-30T17:11:00.003-06:002010-06-30T17:45:41.369-06:00The GrindI have a meeting set up and am having trouble writing a letter to accompany it. I know that the digital lock provisions undercut the majority of the good in the bill but it seems to be harder to put it on paper these days. I can only make a argument so many times before I get tired of it. I don't know how many more times I can talk about how you should be able to back up a DVD so when you give a young child their favorite movie and they eventually scratch it you wont be out a DVD. It is times like this I reminded of a quote from one of my favorite books.<br /><br /><blockquote>"And I realized that to look out for people when you yourself need to do so, when you have a desire to help, is no great feat. But going out there when you don't want to, when you don't care anymore, that might just mean something"<br /><br /><a href="http://www.amazon.ca/Down-This-Splendour-Big-City-Shantytown/dp/0679312285">Shaughnessy Bishop-Stall</a></blockquote><br /><br />Now if you excuse me my often used <a href="http://boingboing.net/2009/07/17/amazon-zaps-purchase.html">Orwell's 1984</a> example beckons.<br /><br />P.S. To whoever combined the copyright act and how it looks before and after it has been amended by C-32 I would like to thank you[<a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/32727487/Copyright-Act-C-32-English-Redline">1</a>].Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-50904492769671920942010-06-30T16:26:00.001-06:002010-06-30T17:10:32.007-06:00Bill C-32 release day<a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/crp-prda.nsf/eng/home">Bill C-32</a> release day went much different from Bill C-61. Fair Copyright Edmonton Chapter had a proper looking media release. It explained who were are, what we have done, and how to contact us. There was no question we were prepared this time around. Alas, nothing came of it from our end.<br /><br />It was interesting to note how the <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5084/125/">media covered the bill</a> emphasizing the digital locks provisions. It looks like the battle lines have been drawn and it is going to be a heated battle too if Heritage Minister James Moore has <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5139/125/">anything to say</a>.<br /><br />Should I dress differently now since I am a radical extremists?Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-78563534001198290192010-05-12T23:16:00.003-06:002010-05-12T23:30:45.965-06:00Final DraftI have finalized the letter I am going to go with. You will notice the posted letter on this blog is missing a fancy graph. If someone is interested in seeing it and the raw data feel free to e-mail me or leave a comment.<br /><br />I now get to work on a new letter for the <a href="http://de-en.gc.ca/en/home/">Digital Economy Consultation</a>. *sigh* The things I do so I can smugly reply "why don't you do something about it?".<br /><br /><blockquote><br /><p>It has been 3, almost 4 years since I started being active on copyright legislation in Canada. During all those years I asked everyone where is the consultation with Canadians. It was the topic of almost every discussion on copyright law I had. There was a public consultation from July 20, 2009, to September 13, 2009 with over 8,000 submissions not to mention the round tables and town halls. The lingering question in my head is did anyone learn anything?<br /><br /><p>I honestly believe that people did learn some of the pitfalls of bad copyright legislation. Unfortunately I do not believe that knowledge has reached the Prime Minister's Office if current news has anything to say. I am now back to doing whatever I can to get the proper information to the right people in order to get a good bill tabled.<br /><br /><p>I ask for legislation that is based on evidence and Canada's needs. The evidence used to draft the bill needs to be properly vetted and open to public scrutiny. Too often organizations have a predetermined answer and do not let the evidence speak for itself. They instead cherry pick pieces of evidence that supports their claim and discard the rest. Copyright legislation needs to be based on evidence that speaks for itself and not evidence that has been cherry picked. <br /><br /><p>Copyright is not a natural right, but a man made one which is why we should not loose sight of what the purpose of copyright law should be when looking at evidence. The purpose of copyright law in the United States is “to promote the progress of science and useful arts” and seeing how the purpose of copyright law is not clearly defined in Canada we should table a bill based on the U.S. definition. We should definitely not table a bill whose purpose is to prop up failing business models or whose purpose is to appease foreign pressure. <br /><br /><p>A problem is that some of the numbers that are used to describe copyright infringement or counterfeiting are not based on any scientific study. For example an often quoted FBI release on July 17, 2002 states “losses to counterfeiting are estimated at $200-250 billion a year in U.S. business losses.” When Ars Technica got a response they found out the FBI had “no record of source data or methodology for generating the estimate and that it cannot be corroborated”.<br /><br /><p>Here is another example of a bad study as shown by Ars Technica <br /><br /><blockquote>After commissioning a 2005 study from LEK Consulting that showed collegiate file-swappers were responsible for 44 percent of movie studio "losses" to piracy, the MPAA then used the report it bought to bludgeon Congress into considering legislation to address this massive problem. Now the MPAA admits that the report's conclusions weren't even close to being right; collegiate piracy accounts for only 15 percent of "losses." Oops. And that's assuming you believe the rest of the data.</blockquote> <br /><br /><p>The problem with these numbers is they are still used today. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation in the United States is a self described “non-partisan research and educational institute – a think tank...[who] publishes policy reports, holds forums and policy debates, advises elected officials and their staff, and is an active resource for the media.” In a December 2009 publication called “Steal These Policies: Strategies for Reducing Digital Piracy” on page 3 is a regular who's who of questionable numbers including the previously mentioned 2005 LEK Consulting study. <br /><br /><p>What worries me is this organization brings poorly vetted obscured evidence to elected officials in the United States. I have to wonder what evidence Canadian elected officials are seeing when it comes to copyright law. <br /><br /><p>By looking at the DMCA in the United States you can see evidence of the chilling effects on free speech that bad copyright legislation can have. The Electronic Frontier Foundation released “Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years under the DMCA” in February 2010 and has 20 examples of how free speech has been chilled in the past. Instead of a simple list I feel the need to post an example that caught my eye in full.<br /> <br /><blockquote>Foreign Scientists Avoid U.S.<br /><br />Foreign scientists have expressed concerns about traveling to the U.S. following the arrest of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov. Some foreign scientists have advocated boycotting conferences held in the United States, and some conference organizers have decided to hold events in non-U.S. locations. In 2001, Russia went so far as to issue a travel advisory to Russian programmers traveling to the United States.<br /><br />Highly respected British Linux programmer Alan Cox resigned from the USENIX committee of the Advanced Computing Systems Association, the committee that organizes many of the U.S. computing conferences, because of concerns about traveling to the United States. He also urged USENIX to move its annual conference offshore.<br /><br />The International Information Hiding Workshop Conference, the conference at which Professor Felten’s team intended to present its original SDMI watermarking paper, chose to break with tradition and held its next conference outside of the U.S. following the DMCA threat to Professor Felten and his team. </blockquote><br /><br /><p>If that is not damning evidence of how bad copyright legislation can chill free speech while simultaneously hurting the security research industry I do not know what is.<br /><br /><p>The last piece of evidence I want to leave with you is a graph of literary copyright registration per population as a function of time in the U.S. What it shows is how little effect extending copyright has on creating new works. In 1909 copyright terms lasted 28 years with another possible 28 years on renewal. Today it lasts the authors life plus 75 years or life plus 95 years if it was a work for hire. If the copyright terms extensions provided incentive to create new work there should have been evidence in the graph below. I do not see it.<br /><br /><br /><p>*Cool Graph Goes here*I recreated this graph from Against Intellectual Monopoly using U.S. government data that can be found online. <br /><br /><p>If the newest copyright legislation looks like the last copyright legislation it means I obviously have not done a good enough job getting the word out on why the previous legislation is not supported by evidence and why it does not fit Canada's needs. If you feel that any of my examples are not clear or if you have any questions please contact me. The contact information is at the top of every page *excluding blogs*.<br /><br /><p>Thanks for reading.<br /></blockquote>Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-34510233196216220412010-05-05T21:41:00.004-06:002010-05-05T21:57:33.692-06:00Newest letterI have now lost count how much I have written about copyright law. Well, here is my latest rough draft for a letter. Go my one reader! Rip apart my grammar and typos.<br /><blockquote><br /><p>It has been 3, almost 4 years since I started being active on copyright legislation in Canada. During all those years I asked everyone where the consultation with Canadians is. It was the topic of almost every discussion on copyright law I had. There was a public consultation from July 20, 2009, to September 13, 2009 with over 8,000 submissions not to mention the round tables and town halls. The lingering questions in my head is did anyone learn anything?<br /><br /><p>I honestly believe that people did learn some of the pitfalls of bad copyright legislation. Unfortunately I do not believe that knowledge has reached the Prime Minister's Office if current news has anything to say.<br /><br /><p>I only ask for legislation that is based on evidence and Canada's needs. By looking copyright laws around the world while using Canadian's opinion we could create a gold standard in copyright legislation. My fear is that we will table a bill that caves in to foreign and big business pressure for reasons not based on evidence.<br /><br /><p>Copyright is not a natural right, but a man made one which is why we should not loose sight of what the purpose of copyright law should be which is “to promote the progress of science and useful arts.” What Canada needs is a properly tabled bill based on evidence that will help the aforementioned purpose not a bill based on fear, or corporation's agendas, or other failed bills, or even maximizing consumer spending. I will only accept a bill based on evidence and Canada's needs<br /></blockquote><br />In case you were wondering what caused my motivation feel free to check out Michael Geist's <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5008/125/">latest post</a>. I was actually starting to believe in Tony Clement. I suppose in a way I still can. I will prepare to aim my dislike over the next copyright bill at James Moore. The ministers of industry are probably tired of me anyways.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-56016740399440416632010-03-17T19:18:00.005-06:002010-04-22T20:13:49.468-06:00Ground Breaking CeremonyWith the recent event's of <a href="http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Language=E&Chamber=N&StartList=A&EndList=Z&Session=23&Type=0&Scope=I&query=6955&List=toc-1">Bill C-499</a> and <a href="http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3&DocId=4345800&File=11">M-506</a> not to mention the <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4841/125/">speech from the throne</a> and Tony Clement's <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4844/125/">response</a> to it means I need to break ground on a new essay which is the first step to meeting a MP. The first MP I meet with in person gets a copy of <a href="http://www.amazon.ca/Public-Domain-Enclosing-Commons-Mind/dp/0300137400/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268876590&sr=8-1">The Public Domain</a>! Admittedly I will deface page 206 by highlighting a paragraph but it is a small price to pay to get a almost pristine book.<br /><br />Here is the passage I am highlighting:<br /><blockquote>In this chapter I want to offer a suggestion that in any other field would be stunningly obvious, boring even, but in the funhouse mirror of intellectual property appears revolutionary. We should make our policy based on empirical evidence of its likely effects and there should be a formal requirement of empirical reconsideration of those policies after they have been implemented to see if they are working. <a href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=Imn6yQjcfZIC&lpg=PA206&ots=3ly1xg_Fpy&dq=In%20this%20chapter%20I%20want%20to%20offer%20a%20suggestion%20that%20in%20any%20other%20field%20would%20be%20stunningly&pg=PA205#v=onepage&q=In%20this%20chapter%20I%20want%20to%20offer%20a%20suggestion%20that%20in%20any%20other%20field%20would%20be%20stunningly&f=false">Why is this a good idea?</a></blockquote><br />One day I will not be the copyright guy because there will be good legislation in place and in the back of my head there will not be the nagging thought of "why don't you do something about it?"<br /><br />Step one in building my essay is find out what happened with the Online Consultations [<a href="http://isppractices.econsultation.ca/">1</a>][<a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/008.nsf/eng/home">2</a>]. Secondly I need to find out what a motion is besides jokingly making a motion for Chris to buy me a pop and hoping someone will second it.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-30464419112112211632009-04-25T13:48:00.002-06:002009-04-25T14:03:02.999-06:00Copyright bill still in the worksMike Lake recently <a href="http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/04/24/esa-canada-schmoozes-lawmakers-games-anti-piracy-pitch">commented</a> on copyright legislation. Nothing particularly earth shattering but at least local MPs have not forgotten about the issues. It would have been nice if someone had the chance to speak to Mike Lake from the consumer standpoint instead of just the ESA. I know I attempted to get a meeting.<br /><br />In case you missed the news the CRTC <a href="http://isppractices.econsultation.ca/">Online Consultation</a> on Net Neutrality is closing soon. If you have not checked it out I recommend you do while there is still time.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-65111675130732160262009-02-08T11:11:00.003-07:002009-02-10T20:18:55.076-07:00Richard StallmanI recently went to a <a href="http://www.fsf.org/events/20090205edmonton">presentation</a> held at the University of Alberta. There is a short write up of the talk <a href="http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article.cfm?id=9960">here</a> and here is a <a href="http://www.globalnerdy.com/2007/07/06/richard-m-stallman-copyright-vs-community-in-the-age-of-computer-networks/comment-page-1/">much more detailed</a> write up on the presentation from 2 years ago.<br /><br />Overall I found the presentation informative... but I did not see any suggested actions that would be useful for those who are upset by the way copyright law is going and want to do something about it. Besides Stallman's suggestion of boycotting products which are unlikely to be boycotted and a generic go to protests message I found the presentation lacking in the crucial area of activism.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-63181418851544020972009-01-14T20:47:00.005-07:002009-01-14T22:12:14.952-07:00It’s about our digital futureMost people know my talking points against bill C-61 and by extension future legislation. It has become quite routine to be able to discusses what I would like to see and what I would not like to see. A harder question to answer is what am I fighting for?<br /><br />I have recently been reading <a href="http://futureoftheinternet.org/">The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It</a> by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Zittrain">Jonathan Zittrain</a>. If any book is able to explain why I am not just fighting against poor copyright legislation but fighting for a digital future it is that book. I many not fully agree with some of the solutions Jonathan Zittrain proposes in the book or the some of predictions he makes but it gets the full scope of the problem.<br /><br />So, for those of you who wondered what sparked my interest in copyright law I now only have to point to that book. The book gets a bit loaded with heavy concepts in the end but it is worth the effort and I recommend reading it.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-9843535603168884842009-01-12T21:20:00.003-07:002009-01-14T22:12:59.456-07:00Tim UppalI have not met <a href="http://www.timuppal.ca/">Tim Uppal</a>; however, a member of the Edmonton chapter has. Nothing quite like seeing a MP in person while he is campaigning to ask for a meeting.<br /><br />I honestly do not have anything detailed to talk about besides that he had a meeting specifically on copyright law. It is one step closer towards my lofty goal which is to know that every Edmonton MP understands the pitfalls of excessive copyright. In some respects you wouldn't think it would be that challenging of a goal...Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-56677280974255077672008-12-18T17:12:00.003-07:002008-12-18T17:19:32.964-07:00ACTA Response<a href="http://www.international.gc.ca/consultations/active/index.aspx?menu_id=2&menu=R">The Government of Canada is seeking the views of Canadians on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)</a><br /><br /><blockquote><br />Dear Mr. Grajkowski,<br /><br />Thank you for your email dated December 1, 2008, regarding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).<br /><br />For any updates pertaining to the ACTA, as well as future public consultations, I invite you to regularly visit the Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada’s Trade and Negotiations page (http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux). We continue to welcome views expressed by interested Canadians.<br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br /><br />Consultations and Liaison Division / Direction des consultations et de la liaison Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada / Affaires étrangères et Commerce international Canada<br /></blockquote>Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-67953194773951750192008-12-16T17:30:00.006-07:002008-12-19T17:37:46.563-07:00TumbleweedsAs most people know by now copyright law as been pushed back. I am still trying to get meetings but until I have one to talk about I will post at least once a month with what I have been reading in monologue fashion.<br /><br /><a href="http://blogs.itworldcanada.com/network-world/2008/12/01/federal-political-wrangling-a-threat-to-tech-reform/">One article</a> I read which interested me speculates about the consequences of the political gamesmanship on copyright law.<br /><br />It is <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3568/125/">official</a> that the MPAA wants the U.S. to bully us into (most likely) abusive intellectual property trade policy (Read: Copyright legislation). No big surprises there.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.cbc.ca/searchengine/blog/2008/11/is_canada_becoming_a_digital_g.html">Is Canada becoming a digital ghetto?</a> I don't think it is becoming a "digital ghetto". Lets leave the term "digital ghetto" for <a href="http://www.rustylime.com/show_article.php?id=2929">countries with ISP filters</a>. I purpose we are becoming digitally backwards. Anyone out there have any better terms for our current digital policy?<br /><br />Hey! Look at that. The RIAA are still bullying people. Disobeying Court Orders? <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081216/0309303138.shtml">Check</a>. Suing students? <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081215/1806163128.shtml">Check</a>. Questionable tactics? <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081029/0213522679.shtml">Check</a>. Forcing abusive laws? <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081118/0301472864.shtml">Check</a>.<br /><blockquote><br />Edit: Interesting news on <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081219/0225073172.shtml">Tech Dirt</a> and <a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081219-no-more-lawsuits-isps-to-work-with-riaa-cut-off-p2p-users.html">Ars</a>.<br /></blockquote><br />The CRTC interests me. First they ruled on the Bell throttling case. I wasn't ecstatic about the ruling but Michael Geist <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3530/125/">explained it</a> to me. They then make a <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3573/125/">ruling</a> that makes me quite happy. The <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3578/135/">new media hearings</a> is going to be a event to watch. I am cautiously optimistic.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081205/1952423036.shtml">Canadian Blank CD Levy To Increase By Another 38%</a>. *sigh*<br /><br />My friend discussed about this <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081119/0334182883.shtml">scheme</a>. I didn't think anyone would actually try it but there it is.<br /><br />I hope I'm not <a href="http://xkcd.com/511/">this</a> bad.<br /><br />Funny how one of my main topics in a meeting is easily covered by a <a href="http://xkcd.com/488/">comic</a> and my fear easily covered in <a href="http://www.myextralife.com/archive.php?date=2008-12-12">another comic</a>.<br /><br />I am <a href="http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080504&mode=classic">definitely refusing</a>.<br /><br />I have no lead up to <a href="http://www.sheldoncomics.com/">this comic site</a> besides saying I'm a huge fan. I recommend visiting it often.<br /><br />...And that is it for now. Come back later for more ranting, more links, and more meeting summaries (I hope).Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-23695132925483951182008-11-28T17:02:00.007-07:002008-12-01T20:54:44.854-07:00ACTA Concerns<a href="http://www.international.gc.ca/consultations/active/index.aspx?menu_id=2&menu=R">The Government of Canada is seeking the views of Canadians on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3513/125/">Michael Geist</a> does not seem optimistic about the whole thing but I am going to be cup half full. I must admit it is going to be challenging to craft a coherent letter with the information that has been <a href="http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/intellect_property.aspx?lang=en&menu_id=7&menu">released</a> so far.<br /><br />The following is the first draft of my letter. Keep in mind I am not a English major. If you see any typos please leave a comment and I shall correct it.<br /><br /><blockquote><br />Counterfeiting is a touchy issue and my concerns are with the ordinary Canadian consumer. My fear is that the "effective legal framework" is going to be over reaching and hurt business, artists, and consumers.<br /><br />Strong intellectual property laws can hurt innovation though frivolous lawsuits and questionable patents. I find this is especially rampant in the tech industry. One quick look at <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog.php?tag=patents">Techdirt</a> shows how intellectual property has been abused so far. My personal favorite is trying to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081107/0118162765.shtml">patent the process of patent trolling</a>. What needs to be kept in mind is intellectual property is a form of temporary monopoly enforced by the state with the goal of growing the economy and creating innovation. Having abusive intellectual property laws does not help that goal. I recommend intellectual property laws in moderation.<br /><br />Any enforcement practice needs to respect peoples privacy. I am strongly against searching laptops at the border because I believe laptops to be a extension of the mind, especially in the business world. People should not be subjected to unwarranted searches under the ACTA.<br /><br />Criminal enforcement needs to differentiate <a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081117-fake-blu-ray-discs-hatched-in-china-industry-is-concerned.html">commercial piracy</a> from <a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071004-verdict-is-in.html">non-commercial priracy</a> as well having rules to protect the system from <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081119/0334182883.shtml">abuse</a>. Without this separation lives can be ruined though expensive and long lasting lawsuits.<br /><br />The ACTA should not target internet distribution and information technology. Any changes to that area can have far reaching and unpredictable effects which is why exhaustive public consultation is needed before even signing noncommittal treaties.<br /><br />These are some of my recommendations and hopefully that will be taken into consideration.<br /><br />Thanks for reading.<br /></blockquote>Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-32876707453843240182008-11-26T17:10:00.004-07:002008-11-26T17:46:01.077-07:00Mike LakeDespite my best efforts it looks like I will not be able to get a meeting with Mike Lake at the moment. I hit a hurdle I expected to hit a while ago. At the moment there is no really active members in Fair Copyright for Canada - Edmonton Chapter that I know of in Mike Lake's riding (If someone reading this is one please get in contact with me). I understand the reasoning behind the decision and I respect it. There is really nothing more I can do.<br /><br />Thumbs up for Jackie at Mike Lake's local office. She has been nothing but kind and helpful. She attempted to talk me into trying yet again to get a meeting with my own MP. Thanks, but no thanks. Maybe when a bill is released I will attempt to meet with her again if only just for fun.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-69818259027021364412008-11-02T13:11:00.003-07:002008-11-03T21:40:21.476-07:00How to: Meet a MPSomehow I have managed to get meetings with a few MPs so I might was well share some of my thoughts on how to get meetings. If anyone knows of a actual how to guide or have additional pointers please post it in the comments.<br /><ul><li>Have some thing in writing and send it in before hand</li></ul>It is best to have your thoughts in <a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/orgwiki/index.php/Letter_writing">writing</a> and send it in before hand. It organizes your thoughts and it will help prepare the MP for the topic your about to discuss. It is especially important for topics that are very specific or not popular.<br /><ul><li>Make phone calls</li></ul>It is better to make a request for a meeting by phone call instead of e-mail. I prefer to catch a person and not go to voice mail which means phoning during business hours. I also try and reference the <a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/orgwiki/index.php/Letter_writing">piece of writing</a> I sent in before hand. Remember, the receptionist is your friend so be kind.<br /><ul><li>I believe that (my/every) MP should understand the effects of copyright legislation</li></ul>This is my favorite line to use because I believe it and it gets passed the "I will pass your concerns onto..." line. As well, being the proactive person you are, you already did pass on your concerns to the person they suggested. Way to go.<br /><ul><li>Be flexible</li></ul>Seriously, MPs are busy people. If you have to wait 2 months for a meeting that is ok. Just ask the receptionist, your new best friend, when is the best time to phone back for a meeting. MPs set aside time to come back from parliament and meet with their constituents so take advantage of it.<br /><ul><li>When in doubt do your best and be kind</li></ul>Just the fact you took your time and are polite is usually enough to meet a MP or, at the very least, for the MP to seriously read your letter.<br /><br />That is what I have figure out so far. Not bad considering I had nothing to go off of in the beginning.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-88289260469852049492008-10-30T19:10:00.004-06:002008-10-30T19:48:36.274-06:00Perspective: The new cabinetApparently it is new <a href="http://pm.gc.ca/eng/cabinet.asp?featureId=8">cabinet</a> day today. Hooray!<br /><br />It looks like Jim Prentice is going to be falling off my radar as he is moved to the Environment. I am going to miss driving down to Calgary and chilling with Fair Copyright for Canada - <a href="http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7146413223">Calgary Chapter</a>.<br /><br />The new Minister of Industry is The Honourable <a href="http://pm.gc.ca/eng/bio.asp?id=69">Tony Clement</a>. The new Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages is The Honourable <a href="http://www.pch.gc.ca/pc-ch/min/moore/index_e.cfm">James Moore</a>. May they do awesome jobs and consult with Canadians.[<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/10/30/tech-clement.html">1</a>,<a href="http://www.tonyclement.ca/EN/3393/">2</a>,<a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3481/125/">3</a>,<a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/ic1.nsf/en/00093e.html">4</a>]Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-5778581691869055412008-10-24T17:44:00.007-06:002009-02-10T19:24:36.264-07:00Scholarly CommunicationDespite odds I managed to make it to Michael Geist's <a href="http://www.library.ualberta.ca/speakers/">presentation</a>. I must admit I was a bit surprised by the turn out. It was nice watching many people diligently taking notes. The presentation was a updated and expanded version of <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3394/125/">Concordia presentation</a>. If you have not seen it yet I recommend it.<br /><br />Fair Copyright for Canada- Edmonton Chapter was there in numbers. It was nice seeing familiar as well as new faces. One day I will be awesome at matching names to faces just due to all the practice I have been getting recently...one day.<br /><br />With a bit of added motivation and a revised game plan it looks like more MPs shall be met. Lets see how the 40th Parliament members do.<br /><br />Edit: <a href="http://bcinfopolicy.ca/2008/10/29/michael-geist-%E2%80%9Cthis-isn%E2%80%99t-really-about-copyright-at-all-it%E2%80%99s-about-our-digital-future%E2%80%9D/">Additional link</a> to a more detailed write up on the presentation.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-71160324721210892522008-10-14T22:10:00.008-06:002008-10-16T17:36:51.558-06:00Distorted 08' election wrap upI must admit watching the election was a bit different this year. Traditionally I see names scroll across the screen that mean almost nothing to me. Only the seats and percentage mattered. Not so this year. I met and paid attention to MPs and they became not just names but people.<br /><br />Thus we arrive at my distorted round up.<br /><br />Minority government: Yay<br />Rona Ambrose Elected: Boooooo<br />James Rajotte Elected: Yay<br />Laurie Hawn Elected: Yay<br />Charlie Angus Elected: Cheers!<br /><span>Hedy Fry Elected: Duly noted.</span><br />Linda Duncan Elected: I have mixed feelings on this. It is no secret that I like the NDP but I did enjoy the meeting I had with Rahim Jaffer. He seemed like a pretty good MP. Did the Conservatives <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3450/125/">stance on copyright</a> loose Rahim Jaffer the race? Either way I have more MPs to meet.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-26375932549439406782008-10-07T19:35:00.012-06:002008-10-08T18:56:07.749-06:00Response to the Conservatives '08 platform: CopyrightTaken from the <a href="http://www.conservative.ca/EN/5317/106938">platform</a><br /><blockquote><br />A re-elected Conservative Government led by Stephen Harper will reintroduce federal copyright legislation that strikes the appropriate balance among the rights of musicians, artists, programmers and other creators and brings Canada's intellectual property protection in line with that of other industrialized countries, but also protects consumers who want to access copyright works for their personal use.<br /><br />We will also introduce tougher laws on counterfeiting and piracy and give our customs and law enforcement services the resources to enforce them. This will protect consumers from phoney and sometimes dangerous products that are passed off as reliable brand-name goods.<br /></blockquote>I really hope when they say reintroduce they do not mean it will be a carbon copy of Bill C-61. All the MPs I have met with agreed that Bill C-61 has <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3094/324/">problems</a>. I imagine they will have a hard time telling me a carbon copy of Bill C-61 "strikes the appropriate balance" with my knowledge that they know better.<br /><br />How do I know my MPs know better? I <a href="http://polyca.blogspot.com/search/label/Meeting">met</a> with them one at a time, multiple times.<br /><br />As for the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement">ACTA</a>, I would love to talk more about it but it appears to be a secretive treaty. Yay democracy :-(<br /><br />I would also like to give a hardy congratulations to the <a href="http://www.charlieangus.net/donate.php?PHPSESSID=31e31375994f7b105b10de54fb59b8f8">NDP</a> for getting my donation. The tag team of the Conservatives and the NDP turned me from political apathy to donator!<br /><br />..I have no idea what the next step after donating is but it scares the heck out of me.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-90062870549725413842008-09-30T21:35:00.012-06:002008-11-03T20:42:38.815-07:00Eye on Rahim JafferThere was a <a href="http://terahertzatheist.ca/2008/09/30/edmonton-strathcona-all-candidates-forum/">Edmonton Strathcona All Candidates Forum</a> I was unable to attend to. Luckily, <a href="http://terahertzatheist.ca/author/thzatheist/">Ian</a> wrote all about it. Thanks!<br /><br /><blockquote><em></em><span style="font-style: italic;">Steve Melenchuk asked what the positions were on dead Bill C-61, which dealt with copyright reform.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Rahim Jaffer</span>: Any reform needs to emphasize balance. This bill was a first crack at this issue and reform attempts are not over.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Linda Duncan</span>: The NDP led the opposition to the bill, exposed data throttling by internet companies and we also need to protect individual artists.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Claudette Roy</span>: Favored protecting IP, but should overhaul the bill</span><br /></blockquote>Rahim Jaffer's response is consistent to what was discussed in the <a href="http://polyca.blogspot.com/2008/09/rahim-jaffer.html">meeting</a> I was in. I would also like to emphasize the fact the NDP, specifically <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Angus">Charlie Angus</a>, is my hero when it comes to copyright and technology in general.<br /><br />Edit: <a href="http://www.charlieangus.net/newsitem.php?id=384&PHPSESSID=2627340342eef791f6917afa588fef42">Additional link</a> to Charlie Angus on copyright.Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2186998172397308867.post-72787070217404438822008-09-19T16:25:00.013-06:002008-10-05T19:24:57.457-06:00Rahim JafferOn Friday, September 19, 2008 I met with <a href="http://www.rahimjaffer.com/">Rahim Jaffer</a>. This marks the last of the 39th Parliament MPs to <a href="http://www.new.facebook.com/event.php?eid=34800216250">meet</a>. Rahim Jaffer is also a <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2603/125/">copyright MP</a>.<br /><br />Me, Ian R, a engineer, and a Athabasca University professor joined in on this meeting. The issues facing <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3332/125/">distance learning</a> was a major issues in this meeting. It was great to have a professor along to make points about Bill C-61 and education issues I would not be able to cover effectively.<br /><br />Rahim Jaffer made a couple commitments.. provided the make up of parliament is not drastically different after the <a href="http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=ele&dir=40ge&document=index&lang=e&textonly=false">election</a>.<br /><ul><li>There will be a proper hearing for the next copyright bill</li><li>He will push for a traveling committee.</li></ul>I also received more advice on what the next step is, which is quickly becoming tradition in every meeting.<br /><br />Anyone up for helping writing a summary on the Fair Copyright for Canada - Edmonton Chapter's view on copyright legislation?Corey Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07455731948812358483noreply@blogger.com0