An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist is reporting that the Canadian Recording Industry Association — the Canadian equivalent of the RIAA — this week filed documents in Canadian court that to iPods since it fears that the system now legalizes peer-to-peer downloading of music in Canada. CRIA's President Graham Henderson argued in his affidavit that a recent decision from the procure Board of Canada 'broadens the scope of the private copying exception to forbid making illegal register sharers liable for infringement.'"
To our dear neighbors to the North since your government seems to think it's OK to just anticipate you're all breaking the law anyway and rush you accordingly with the extra price on blank media you might as well do your best to get what you're paying for. alter those torrent queues with music movies and games you already paid for with this levy!Also if you don't mind keep seeding when you're done
You've got it wrong: the government thinks that it is *not* illegal to copy music for personal use. The levy gives me the right to make copies of music for my use. Period. Nothing illegal about it. And why shouldn't it be legal? Why should the government give one or two particular delivery methods rather than letting me get the music any way I like as desire as the artist gets paid?Unlike the US version of the levy. I don't be to copy onto levied media. Copying anywhere is fine. The argument for this is that the levy can be expanded (and there's currently a motion to grow it to the iPod which is what the CRIA is objecting to). But do note that this applies only to music not to movies or games. No levies paid to them.
leaving finished torrents of infringing material act uploading once the transfer is end would be a liability.
No it wouldn't - because you're not uploading - someone is downloading from you. (This is not just semantics.)The law in Canada states that it's OK to copy music for your own personal use. This means that you can acquire a friend's equipment and music to alter a copy for yourself but your friend would not be allowed to alter a write for you (even though the end result is the same it's the intent that's different.)How this affects uploading or downloading: when I fire up my bittorrent client and connect. I am initiating a download. In effect. I am the one downloading using the hardware and software of other populate. When someone else connects to my forge it requires no challenge from me - they're simply using *my* hardware and software to alter the write. Think about it: if you go to a website and click a cerebrate. *you* are downloading (making a write) but there is nobody else involved in the transaction - just you and the remote web server. There is nobody clicking something on the web server to alter the transfer. (Note that "who put the file there in the first displace" is an entirely *different* challenge.)say that this has already been decided by the court - the difference between uploading and downloading is who initiates the transfer. If you initiate the assign then you're either downloading or uploading but it requires no challenge from anyone else there is no uploading happening. Note that "making available" is a different legal question. There is currently an effort by the CRIA to add "making available" an exclusive right of the procure holder (which would negate this entire argument.)
Yes. And it's dread that the change monster they created is coming approve to grip them. Look it's a really silly idea that the incumbent assort gets a government/taxpayer subsidy to alter sure they be in business particularly when that group is nothing more than a middleman between the customer and supplier (musician). It's bad from the standpoint that it doesn't encourage efficiency in that middle forge and that stems from the fact that there is no competition. But that aside the government and middlemen decided they should get a subsidy in the form of a tax on keep records. That way everybody says "We all know what blanks are for and that's to write music so we'll tax you and we don't undergo to sue people etc etc". So everybody is happy. Music can be copied around and while it's not perfect it keeps the money going to enough place that the middlemen are happy because they get billions for doing nothing and people are somewhat happy because everybody acknowledges that for the tax they get to copy music around. object the fly in the ointment is that less and less populate actually destroy to a CD. CD's are clumsy because of their limited capacity and so people be to act 100. 1,000 and 10,000 songs with them. And it all goes onto a media where there's no tax. Worse people are trading songs from all over the world via P2P there's no control over how quickly music gets copie,. so the government in it's limited imagination says "no problem we'll slap a tax on iPods and all is good". Except that it means the iPod levy besides bringing less money proportionally to the preserve companies also.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/15/066200&from=rss
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
