From russellmcormond at gmail.com Fri Dec 31 19:32:37 2010 From: russellmcormond at gmail.com (Russell McOrmond) Date: Fri Dec 31 19:31:25 2010 Subject: [discuss] Discussing Copyright related policy for 2010 Message-ID: <4D1E7625.2070102@gmail.com> Earlier this afternoon I posted a blog article http://www.cluecan.ca/node/1194 discussing some of the things that have happened this year in Copyright that CLUE folks would want to know about. There is one section that may be controversial or deserve some discussion, so I thought I would copy it here to start that discussion. ----------- Extension of existing private copying regime to devices I believe this is a hard one for our community as it forces us to recognize priorities. As a community most of us are opposed opposed to a system which makes technology more expensive, and that subsidizes unrelated business interests. When the Conservative party held a press conference in Ottawa's Rideau Center and then later launched a radio ad, many in our community were cheering. While it seems that the Conservatives are on our side, the policies that are in C-32 say something quite different. Each of the reasons party a representative gave for opposing a levy on devices applies far more to non-owner locks on devices than it does to the levy. The damage caused by non-owner locks to the Canadian technology sector and the interests of Canadian technology owners is orders of magnitude worse than the harm of the levy. We need to recognize that even if we agree with the Conservatives about the levy, we must ensure that Conservatives recognize that the existing policy in C-32 is far worse. -- Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition! http://fix.billc32.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!"