Copyright Consultations
copyrightconsultation.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
First
Previous
Archived - Copyright and You - Discussion
Comments for period August 16 - 17, 2009
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
Comment
Ā titre de créateur, je crois que le gouvernement doit mettre en place des lois sur le droit d'auteur qui assurent que ce dernier est bien protégé et rétribué adéquatement. La protection du droit d'auteur est importante pour les artistes et les entreprises du Canada et bénéficient à tous les canadiens et à notre économie.
Comment
As a musician myself, I am 100% against a copyright reform, I think the copyright laws should be left alone, they are fine just the way they are. I for one make my music readily available online for people to download, if they can make it better, all the power to them, if just one of my classical pieces can make one persons day and cheer them up, that is great, my job is done. I didnt become a musician to make money, I became a musician to change my world, and the world of people out there. For me it isnt about the money, cause I dont want it, it is a way to express myself and the person I am, and I think the Music Industry has lost sight of that. I have a few friends that are well known musicians, such as Steven Tyler, Celine Dion, and so forth, and they are also 100% against the Copyright reform, did you know Steven Tyler actively tried to stop the passing of the DMCA in the USA before it became law. As a musician, I know for a fact, you dont make any damn money from people buying your CD's, you might get 50 cents from a sale of a CD, max $1, and in this day and age, that is probably all you will see is that $1, cause the minute someone buys that CD, it is already uploaded online, and people download it. If the government is truely listening, you should know, as a musician, we only Make money if we perform live in Concert, that is how we make money, not from CD sales, and definitely not from the Music industry, they are just a bunch of greedy scumbags.
Also I am a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer, and I work with computers for a living, if this law gets passed from what I understand of it, I am going to have to ask for permission to make back up's of all the software I require to use when repairing a Computer/Server. I think that is pure BS, I am using this software legally, and CD/DVD's over time do get scratched and unusable. Now this is what is going to happen, this law gets passed, and when people ask for permission to make back ups, the companies are going to charge people full price to make back ups of there software, and when they burn that software to CD/DVD's they must delete it off of there computer, or risk being brought to court for not complying with the company that gave them permission to make a back up, I know this cause it is happening right now in the USA. This is also happening if people are making back ups of there music and movies.
Another thing I am worried about as well, is if people already own a music CD, or a DVD of a movie, and download them cause the media they have has become unusable over time, I personally Dont see the point of having to goto a store an repurchase something I have already bought, and wasting more money when I already own it, it makes more sence to just download it.
It is pretty sad if you ask me, in the last 5 years, I have seen more laws come into affect, taking away peoples civil rights. A majority of these laws are mirror images of laws passed in the United states. In just the last 3 years since Stephen Harper became Prime minister of Canada, I have seen a majority of Laws come into affect that take away more rights from Canadians, Some laws being passed silently. Like when the Hell did we become the 53rd state of the USA, I dont remember agreeing to this. I can remember my Grandfather telling me when this country was ran by great people with passion for what they were doing, Now it is mainly run by the USA and Corporations. All the prime minister is, is a figure for greedy Corporations and people, gauranteed they are paying the government money behind closed doors. Things we as canadians used to take for granted 20 years ago are now illegal, thanks to the government of Canada.
I think the Conservative, Liberal, NDP, and Bloc Parties, need to take a few days and meet Ordinary average hard working canadians, and maybe do a little manual labour yourselves, to remind you of what it means to make an honest living in Society, and what makes a majority of Canadians so Humble and respectable. Cause it seems to me, that Politicians seem to become useless after a few years, they forget how to listen to people, and only understand the Language that money speaks. Also the government needs to take a good look at our Constitution, and also take a good look at the Canadian charter of Rights and Freedoms, and re-read it, cause it seems that you are forgetting what is in Both.
I truely hope the government is taking people seriously, cause if the new copyright bill gets passed, and takes away our rights and freedoms, and the right to use the internet what it was meant for, which is to connect with each other and the world, share files, and idea's, and the right to download music, software, movies, and so forth, as a Canadian, it is my right to get the signatures I need, to force the government to dissolve, and force a new Election, wether it is a Majority or minority government.
Response(s)
Tones [2009-08-17 14:07] Comment ID: 1713 Reply to: 1709
I do agree with your right to distribute as you do.
For others though, artistic works are put into a marketplace to help create a living.
Some do, some don't expect people to pay for such.
Those that do not require payment will render their works accordingly.
Imagine that one of your works is altered and the person then makes money from your part of the work and you don't?
I guess you have already surmised that this is OK?
But
Those who do require money for their years of work should be paid from all sources that the work is used or sold in.
The reforms I believe are to help prevent the theft of works by freeloaders who do not contribute, but rather just take, use, and pass on.
Its like stealing milk at the store?
Pretty soon the farmer can't pay his land tax because no one is paying for the milk.
In regards to how much one receives from a CD sale in your recording agreement, these points are negotiable and you will only see remuneration after the initial expenses to make the CD are recouped by the label. This is not copyright though.
Copyright is for intellectual property ownership.
What you create is yours to sell or share as you wish.
There are some people who do write, play all instruments, record engineer, produce, do the art work, press the product, distribute it and promote it by learning to write web pages, and associate with already established web pages for further distribution. So the world gets to hear or see their art. The online service has to be paid for? So does the mac or whatever junk involved in creating, packaging the image to the world, applications etc that other people have created.
The hard work of these people are paid for in some way. Sometimes by copyright and patent. Sometimes by corporate salary to those who work under consignment.
The scale has tipped as far as the return for a CD in the independent market.
For an independent sale it is common today to receive 91% of the sale.
Thats $9.10 cents out of a ten dollar CD sale!
For these people who do all this work as independents for themselves it would be just rotten for free loaders to just take this hard work in the form of an mp3 and copy it uncountable times and then move on to the next art like vultures.
What is popular or not is not in question but it is the attraction.
In the case of any music or written property it is up to the law to protect the rights of the owner.
To devise a sound procedure to make the work secure and traceable with a fair rate of payment in the electronic MARKETPLACE.
The internet is a new communications network for the world and is in this way a good thing that every one can contact every one.
However the world is not a free place nor is the internet a free network. To share info on it is good as long as it is yours to share. No harm in this.
To take and share property of others and expect them to suck it up for your personal pleasure?
Would you prefer that the whole world just jump aboard a train and no one pays for the ride or fuel? Upkeep maintainance? Do you get paid for your job of PC repairs? Perhaps you'd like to do this for free and tell Steve Tyler this is what you do?
Right he would say!
If the copyright laws are not up to date to secure the rights of works owners in the whole marketplace then it makes theft of people's work un accountable.
I'll be right over for a free PC repair.
In other words people need to be paid for their contribution before those who steal it are able to recklessly use it without accountability.
Song writing is a love to many writers including myself.
It is easy to write a song in ten minutes and one may share hundreds of them free, once recorded but there are other labour intensive procedures that surround the process that cost a lot of one's time.
Some feel that other people should not benefit with out paying for all this hard work.
For those who may be well off it may be trivial.
For those who starve for the process and love it at the same time it might well be a labour of love that would be incredibly gratifying to one day receive something that could help perpetuate the process.
Imagine all the writers just stopped because they were finished with the idea of copyright theft?
Could you just keep listening to the 70's loop that has dominated commercial radio?
As for being a PC technician and having to copy application disc's I'm sure there could be a reform in the copyright law to help your case there.Perhaps the applications distributors should make allowances for dedicated registered repair shops.
On a positive note I would try to bid for this!
It is a worthy request.
There is already a medium copy rate for blanks. Copyright holders do receive a small bit for the millions of blank CD's and DVD's that are sold.
I have been an independent since 80's and I see very little from my music releases.
Never the less I am compelled to write.
It is just something I love to do.
Not a popularity contest for me but I do try to distribute my art around.
With out any money from the world for any of it.
So it is not the greed of money that shapes my feelings on this.
I just feel that as long as there is an intellectual medium that people use to boost their own product or happiness, then whom ever is using it should pay for it or just leave it be as they would the neighbours car, house, clothes on the line, mail, or any other property that does not belong to them.
Including all the music they do not like.
Do not be lured by Radio Heads announcement that one can pay as much as they can afford to set the standard.
This is a sales preference not a copyright of intellectual property requirement.
They too certainly must feel overwhelmed by the millions of freeloaders on the e network who otherwise would and still do just steal their music!
Billboardproducer [2009-08-30 20:47] Comment ID: 2137 Reply to: 1709
1. No new copyright law could possibly stop YOU from giving away YOUR music.
It would be nice if this was the creator's choice. No?
2. Re software. Whatever happened to the laws of Supply and Demand. If a company wants to charge for a back-up it's their right to do so. If Steve Tyler want so to charge $100 for an Aerosmith ticket, it's his right to do so. No one is forcing you to go.
ccapon [2009-09-08 11:11] Comment ID: 2317 Reply to: 2137
"If a company wants to charge for a back-up it's their right to do so."
Actually, that's precisely the point up for debate. Producers shouldn't necessarily and arbitrarily have the right to limit what individuals do with their purchases. It is especially problematic when consumers are not aware of the limits placed on them prior to purchasing.
Setting the price of the sale - that's a producer's right.
Consumer's use of the product after the sale - not their domain.
Billboardproducer [2009-09-08 13:06] Comment ID: 2326 Reply to: 2317
I don't disagree with you.
These are the types of things that need to be addressed while amending our copyright laws. There are many people on this blog in complete denial about our need to address these issues, and I just can't understand the opposition.
My assumption is that new amendments will help protect the content creators while maintaining the rights and freedom of users. The internet is like the wild west, and until there are better parameters for companies to do business, guerilla tactics will continue to escalate as copyright producers continue to do unpopular things to produce income and protect their assets.
It seems to me the focus of discussion should be illegal distribution of copyright material. If you make copyright material (without ownership) available for mass/public consumption - you must be held accountable.
From what I understand, we have the technology to make a url disappear entirely with in our borders.
If there is unprotected material existing for public consumption - the copyright holder should be able to file a complaint -and take action if necessary. There can simply be fair warning (for example a 3 strike rule) so that accidental violators have time to comply.
I know this is an oversimplified suggestion -but we need to put some basic concepts in place and then sort out what laws can support these concepts.
Comment
Je suis musicien et réalisateur depuis 10 ans. Mais je peux-dire que j'ai encore beaucoup plus d'années de formation. Depuis plus de 25 ans que j'apprends et exécute mon art. Un docteur, avocat ou ingénieur étudient quelques 4 a 8 ans pour obtenir un salaire intéressant. Un musiciens travaille parfois aussi fort durant plus de temps pour acquérir le métier qui est le sien. Mais les revenus sont loin d'être les mêmes. Je ne peux pas aller voir un docteur sans ma carte soleil ou sans payer. Un avocat a droit a son salaire et je ne peux aucunement le pirater lui. Alors si je travaille durant un an pour produire et réaliser un album je crois qu'en tant que musiciens, j'ai aussi droit a un salaire respectable. Et ce n'est point de la cupidité mais simplement une question de survie. Je crois que les gens qui défendent les lois actuelles sur les droits d'auteurs et qui sont contre la réglementation des ISP (Fournisseur d'internet) ont probablement quelques intérêts à ce que les choses restent ainsi ou même pire; profitent de cette "gratuité". Nous ne sommes pour la plupart peu ou pas subventionnés, que ce soit par un organisme gouvernemental ou commercial et par surcroit touchons de moins en moins de Royauté sur nos oeuvres car monsieur et madame tout-le-monde se donnent le droit de télécharger "illégalement" ce qui nous prends des centaines d'heure a réaliser. Je crois que c'est à l'Artiste lui-même à décider si il veut ou non rendre son oeuvre disponible et gratuite et seulement sous son contrôle absolu. Si le gouvernement ne change pas les lois, il se rends lui-même complice de vol par inaction. Réaliser et commercialiser coûte très cher. 10 000$ a 60 000$ pour le studio, probablement autant pour la promotion. Et un artiste gagne en moyenne 1,50$ par copie vendu. Il doit donc vendre entre 7 000 a 40 000 album juste pour rentrer dans son argent. Même les plus grandes stars au Québec on peine à rentabiliser leur investissement alors imaginez seulement un artiste pas connu qui essai de payer son loyer avec un album auto-produit. C'est mission impossible si ses chansons se retrouvent sur piratebay, mininova ou rapidshare pour ne nommer que ces sites de piratage. En téléchargeant illégalement une chanson, un album ou même une discographie complète le fraudeur lance le message a l'artiste qu'il n'a pas le droit au respect et qu'il ne mérite que de se faire voler en pleine dans sa face. Durant ce temps c'est Péladeau et compagnie qui s'enrichit en facturant le téléchargement supplémentaire aux clients. Ce sont les torrent qui font de l'argent avec les publicité, ce sont les marchands d'ordinateur et leurs fabricants qui font fortune la-bas en chine en nous offrant les instruments nous permettant de voler les artisans que nous "aimons tant". Je propose donc: que le gouvernement impose aux fournisseur d'internet et ce sans discrimination que l'accès à tous les sites permettant de télécharger gratuitement musique, films et software soit bloqué. Que le gouvernement crée une équipe permanente qui répertorie la création de ces site et donne une mise à jour constante aux fournisseur internet afin de bloquer d'éventuel nouveau sites ou moyens de téléchargements illégaux.
