The German Pirate Party stepped up to help: http://wikileaks.piratenpartei.de/
(Pssst… hey You, Pirate Party of Canada… yeah you guys….
howsabout you step up and offer to host WikiLeaks North America…?)
And if anyone managed to hang onto any doubt about the fact that both WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, personally, are actually under attack, just look at the frequency of attacks on his Wikipedia biography: Wikipedia: Revision history of Julian Assange
I think that this film is brilliant in its simplicity; it explains exactly what is wrong with what Annie Leonard calls the Electronics industry’s “Designed for the Dump” strategy.
They try to make this sound palatable by calling it “planned obsolescence”.
Deliberately manufacturing short lived physical materiel is not environmentally sustainable.
Bill C-32 legislates stuff to the Dump
Bill C-32, the so-called “Copyright Modernization Act,” has finished Second Reading and is in committee.
In spite of near universal opposition to this legislation which continues many bad elements first seen in its predecessors, Bill C-60 and C-61, the draft Bill C-32 ignores the majority of citizen input provided through the 2009 Copyright Consultation.
But as bad as the American DMCA is, Bill C-32, the Canadian version will be much worse.
The DMCA does not make any aspect of their Fair Use regime subservient to technical measures, making the DMCA closer to the intent of the 1996 WIPO treaties to tie TPMs to infringing activities than C-32.
Q: How does “The Story of Electronics” tie in to the draft Canadian Bill C-32?
A: Making repair and recycling illegal will legislate Electronics to the Dump
By making circumvention of digital locks illegal for any purpose, electronics and media that still work, or that could be made to work, will now be legally consigned to the dump. Format shifting, recycling and repair of electronics with digital locks will be illegal.
Digital Locks prevent format shifting.
Unlike videotape, DVDs will play in any DVD player. At least until manufacturers add region encoding (digital locks/DRM/TPM). When a Florida company shipped me a European DVD instead of the region 1 DVD that I would have been able to play on a Canadian DVD player, for me the DVD was garbage. I couldn’t play it the first time.
The company was aware that it was an error and shipped me a new copy of the DVD that was Region 1, so I wasn’t out of pocket. (They did not want the DVD back.) But the environment was.
When people move geographical locations if they move to a different “DVD region,” suddenly all their old technology and media can no longer be used because of digital locks. The ONLY reason that this is so is because of the digital locks applied by the manufacturer. Their idea is, as always, to sell more stuff. Wringing extra money from the consumer.
Consumers want to format shift, again for personal use, so that they can access their legally purchased content on their different devices.
When media and the devices we play it on become obsolete they proliferate in our dumps.
Digital Locks prevent us from repairing problems caused by DRM/TPM
Nobody seems to talk about the fact that the addition of digital locks/DRM/TPM quite often makes our media and devices not work. Ever had trouble playing your home burned home movie DVD in your DVD player. Or your grandmother’s DVD player? How about burning home movie DVDs at all.
Chances are that your digital stuff doesn’t work/is broken BECAUSE of digital locks. DRM. TPM,
If Bill C-32 passes as is, it will be illegal to fix it.
I foolishly bought an HP bubble printer without realizing the ink cartridges have DRM. It doesn’t matter how much ink is actually left in the cartridge, my cartridges are empty when the digital locks say they are. Which means, among other things, that I can’t save money and the environment by refilling them.
But I expect that refilling printer toner cartridges that have TPM will be illegal under Bill C-32 too.
No one is talking about this. Are they copyright issues? They should not be. But it once circumventing digital locks becomes illegal across the board I would expect they would be covered by Bill C-32.
Then there are all the OTHER uses of digital technology. Digital elements exist in refrigerators and cars, not just music and movies. If there aren’t TPMs on these things now, there will be once Bill C-32 becomes law. Because if circumventing digital locks is illegal, manufacturers would be foolish not to put digital locks on anything they can.
Which would be an even worse environmental catastrophe. Governments should not be legislating anti-interoperability. For the good of the environment.
Canada’s technology will not just be
“Designed For The Dump”
“Legislated To The Dump”
by Bill C-32
[[Note to Malcolm Gladwell: yes Malcolm, there are online activists, and you know what? They do good work!]
[Just in case there is any confusion about the title, this blog article is purely my own. It should not be blamed on one of the many excellent grassroots movements in opposition to the secret ACTA trade agreement, Mexico’s Open ACTA whose Twitter account name is @StopACTANow. ]
In case you don’t know what all the ACTA fuss is about (and why should you, the mainstream media, with it’s vested interest, is not reporting on ACTA) this is a Video that gives a pretty good overview:
Funny, even though consensus couldn’t be reached, the ACTA countries have each taken the agreement back to their respective governments to try and get it signed. They have all agreed that there will be no further rounds of negotiation.
Apparently though, changes can still be made to the text. Since I am a citizen, not a diplomat, I have to wonder if this means that each country can sign a version of ACTA that they are comfortable with, respective of the wants and needs of the others? If so, it would detract from the point of having one universal treaty.
Do the participating parties know? Apparently President Obama wants to have something signed before his election. Its beginning to sound as though anything will do.
This is, of course, how bad laws and bad treaties are made.
Would ACTA benefit the citizens of any country? Clearly, the answer to that would have to be “no.” ACTA is to the benefit of specific corporations at the expense of people. In it’s original incarnation it was purely a corporate wish list.
Either way, it still hasn’t gone away.
Here are a few links worth checking:
TechDirt points out that Korea (a possible model for ACTA) was pressured into a 1 strike law as part of a “free trade” agreement. In South Korea One ACCUSATION gets you evicted from the Internet.
Open… : KEI’s Jamie Love on what EU must do About ACTA Respected UK journalist Glynn Moody reports Jamie Love’s tweet which points out that an ACTA footnote opens the way to removing Patents from ACTA altogether. (Weak ties, eh? Sure looks like International Co-operative Activism to me, Malcolm.)