The article proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Canadian response to file sharing is far better for the artists than the US RIAA model of sue em all — in fact 2342% better as far as royalty payment to the artists are concerned.

Well according the US anyway that isnt the US is a “pirate haven”

and anywhere that isnt infested with DRM or DMCA ha!

I’m assuming this is in reference to the blank media levy.

That’s just invoking the “Pandora’s Box” effect.
The only trouble with this “business model”, is that, if it’s adopted as an acceptable one, then EVERY other group that’s crying “piracy is killing us” will want “in”! Next thing you know, all the industries will be demanding their own “levy” on everything from blank media to services and devices – movie, software, publishers, royalty collectors, ad infinitum.

They’ve all pretty well told us what kind of exhorbitant price they’d “need” to accept such an arrangement. It would be totally unworkable from that end alone.

They make these neat auger things to fix that freezes over thing.

That’s like saying “those kids on tricycles are so much more dangerous on the pathways because they speed” compared to people like me on two-wheeled racing bicycles, zipping along at 30km/h.

What gets the CRIAA is the successful example that Canada have shown the rest of the world in distributing royalties from the media tax directly to artists.

The CPCC has started an excellent methodology of collecting and distributing royalties.
http://cpcc.ca/english/finHighlights.htm
This concept exists because as they say on the website:

more and more,
the music people listen to
is music they have copied themselves. Private copying is
increasing. But the people that create that music do so for a living.
That’s why there is a royalty on the media used for copying.

It goes on a bit, however, what Canada has done is to achieve a return to artists.
Countries that have no media tax and instead use up the time of the courts to obtain million dollar settlements that will never be paid, do so at the risk of recovering very little of the royalties that Canadian artists receive.

I find it interesting that a business model that works is totally ignored by the members of the RIAA. Why? Some would say, it’s not enough moolla. Others (more cynical old buggers like me) would say, the RIAA don’t like anything “Not invented by the RIAA – (EVEN IF IT WORKS). ”

It’s a shame that more people (err, that’s you guys) don’t write to their congressmen, senators members etc to let them know how you will be voting next elections.

Dear Member,

I intend to vote for the candidate that hasnt been purchased by RIAA political donations.
In other words. I am sick of the majority of citizens of (insert country) being criminalised because of organisations donating large sums to political parties.

If everyone did this, the face of politics would change real fast.

Sincerely
John Q. Citizen.
A voter in your district.

Shall we drop this Barrie McKenna and all the member of CRIAA in the Hudson bay this winter?

Yes:
No:

If there is a majority of yes we will do that.

Please vote! Thanks!

The correct word is COVE.

If you pay them enough, they will write a story as you see fit. They are the cheaper version of the Conference Board of Canada.

That sums up the globe & mail.

I do it on cbc.ca , ctv.ca everyday for kicks. Ive been accused of being in some kind of conspiracy to bury conservatives… but really they all deserved it. Use it wisely go after the industry shills and partisan attacks.

Sure they quoted gary fung and thats great they thought to include the other side of the debate. However, they only used it as a means of further arguing index sites are popping up in canada because of the nature of our copyright law. Which is BS.

Dear Barrie Mckenna, your employer would be better serving canadians by publishing stories based on fact instead of industry hearsay. Heres an example. Compare the Globe article to this CNET article by blogger Greg Sandoval of CNET news.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-10378654-261.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
The message you’re trying to convey is simply not true and in fact is the opposite of what reputable industry critics and legal educators have been saying. You blame it on “index sites” taking refuge in Canada but this blogger blames it on lack of legitimate options and the entertainment industries own mistakes. The minute you quote what a CRIA rep has to say as relevant to your article you lose all credibility in this debate.

I dont know how you live with yourself. Might be a bit easier with a little more weight in your wallet I would be willing to bet.

Then you see those using logic, discussing availability and how licensing hinders availability because “oh, we can’t license in Canada, sorry” so you have no alternative but to use isohunt or something similar. That shows how licensing takes priority over getting the content out there and getting paid. It also shows how these content providers are not understanding the internet or its power at all.

Those posts have 35 thumbs up and 2 thumbs down.

Do you think Canadians are shameful of their “pirate haven” mislabeling? Or are they thinking with logic and reasoning and corporate spindoctors are the ones who are out of touch with reality? My bet and all evidence points to the latter.