<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Canadian DMCA looms. Again</title>
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15996</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net offers not-your-lamescream news on movies music digital media P2P peer-to-peer TV television file sharing freedom of speech open source product news Wifi mobiles company</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:25:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Rafael Venegas</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15996#comment-494119</link>
		<author>Rafael Venegas</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 10:09:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15996#comment-494119</guid>
		<description>Royalties are a distant last.

"It only takes a few seconds to send an email to Prentice, the Prime Minister, and your local MP, letting them know that Canadians won’t be deceived by a Canadian DMCA and that Canadian copyright reform should reflect fair copyright principles"

As to "fair copyright principles"....

Far less than one percent of the population anywhere have ever received any kind of payment or royalties for intellectual property (IP). Copyrght law is an erroneouos idea that allegedly gives this miniscule percent of the population an incentive to create more IP. No one has researched the idea to determine that it is a net gain incentive at all. 

But even if the incentive worked, it would work only for the benefit of the foreign controlled (foreign in most vountries) corporate clan that control each segment of the IP industries.

99 percent of the population does not need nor care about IP laws that do nothing for their own culture and their own creators. 

Based on the previous, the fairest copyright principle is the "no copyright" principle that allows free copying (without a huge legal industry to enforce). Pay the creators through means that incentivate only the better creators (salaries?). And by the way, the greatest incentive is not money, but recognition. Salaries are second. Royalties are a distant last.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Royalties are a distant last.</p>
<p>&#8220;It only takes a few seconds to send an email to Prentice, the Prime Minister, and your local MP, letting them know that Canadians won’t be deceived by a Canadian DMCA and that Canadian copyright reform should reflect fair copyright principles&#8221;</p>
<p>As to &#8220;fair copyright principles&#8221;&#8230;.</p>
<p>Far less than one percent of the population anywhere have ever received any kind of payment or royalties for intellectual property (IP). Copyrght law is an erroneouos idea that allegedly gives this miniscule percent of the population an incentive to create more IP. No one has researched the idea to determine that it is a net gain incentive at all. </p>
<p>But even if the incentive worked, it would work only for the benefit of the foreign controlled (foreign in most vountries) corporate clan that control each segment of the IP industries.</p>
<p>99 percent of the population does not need nor care about IP laws that do nothing for their own culture and their own creators. </p>
<p>Based on the previous, the fairest copyright principle is the &#8220;no copyright&#8221; principle that allows free copying (without a huge legal industry to enforce). Pay the creators through means that incentivate only the better creators (salaries?). And by the way, the greatest incentive is not money, but recognition. Salaries are second. Royalties are a distant last.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Kee</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15996#comment-484186</link>
		<author>Don Kee</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 02:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15996#comment-484186</guid>
		<description>What is this DMCA? My best guess, digital music curmudgeon's act</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is this DMCA? My best guess, digital music curmudgeon&#8217;s act</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
