Jim Prentice vs Canadians
p2pnet news view | Freedom:- George W. Harper’s Conservative government and industry minister Jim Prentice were forced to take a huge, and highly embarrassing, step backwards when they tried to table a deeply flawed copyright plan dubbed the Canadian DMCA.
It would have opened Canadians to direct attacks from the entertainment cartels under legislation similar to that already in place in the United States.
But Prentice and Harper were thwarted by P2P Power wielded by online activists labelled Telecom Trotskyites in the Financial Post, which also singles out Ottawa or professor Dr Michael Geist as one of the principal leaders.
“Canadians owe Hollywood and the Big 4 record labels a hearty vote of thanks, this Christmas season,” p2pnet posted.
“By trying to foist entertainment cartel copyright rule on Canadians, the labels and studios have provided incentive for people across the nation to band together.
“Thanks to the Net, blogs, IM, chat, cell phones, PDAs, the people have a voice, loud, strong and powerful. And they’re using it to talk to each other no matter who or where in the world they are, forcing their elected representatives to listen.”
Prentice blustered the bill won’t be tabled until he and heritage minister Josée Verner “are satisfied,” putting it back until after Christmas in the hope the fuss will die down.
But it won’t.
The fact online Canadians were able to bring enough media pressure to bear to stop Prentice in his tracks hasn’t gone unnoticed not only in Canada —- Geist was interviewed on The Hour, for example —- but around the world.
And, “as the copyright issue gains widespread exposure, more of the public will better appreciate its importance and politicians will come to understand that a fair approach that meets the needs of both creators and users is essential,” blogs Geist, going on:
There is a downside, however. As much as I’d like to talk about how much fun it was to be on the Hour or why Corcoran’s position on copyright is completely inconsistent with his typical minimalist regulatory approach, this issue is not about me. I’ve talked about the need for balanced copyright for many years, but we’ve never seen this much public engagement in copyright. That is because the real story is that copyright matters to people and they now have the tools to make their voices heard.
I’m thrilled to have played a role in raising awareness, but the real credit goes to the thousands of people who took the time to write or call their elected representatives, to blog about the issue, to attend the Toronto or Calgary events, or to raise awareness with their friends, family and community.
As Harold Jarche posts on Geist’s blog, “Thanks for taking the lead on this important debate, as many of us don’t have the legal expertise to comment in a completely informed manner. Yes, the credit goes to thousands of people, but you have helped to clarify the key issues. Copyright matters to me, but I could not have explained the issues as well as you have.
Thank you and enjoy the holidays 
”
This is just the beginning so stay tuned.
Jon Newton – p2pnet
Also See:
Telecom Trotskyites – Attention Telecom Trotskyites!, December 21, 2007
blogs Geist – Canadian DMCA brings Canadians together, December 20, 2007
Want to help p2pnet stay online? Please click here.
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
December 21st, 2007 at 4:17 pm
I’m glad to see that it is possible to comment here – I notice that the FP page does not allow such potential dissent on its page. Their story is obviously the TRUTH!!! It seems a shame that it is not possible to point out to the corporate dinosaurs that the issue is more complex than just protecting their right to rent-seek wherever they can get away with it. Consumers have rights too and the threat of mass law suits in Canada resulting from the abandonment of consumer rights is really unpalatable. When wealthy monopolies take consumers to court, consumers lose – either court costs, damages or both. Even the innocent cannot win. I, for one, do not want to pay for the cost of providing court venues for this kind of abuse.
December 21st, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Of course FP does not allow comment, they represent the narrow interests of stakeholders in member corporations of the MPAA and RIAA.
Telecom Trotskyites? If that’s the best they can do, I would say we have little to fear.