Zellweger’s Set?

4 February 2008 @ 2:27 am


Faux Fishing Shacks (by sτενεωooδroω)

While snowshoeing today, a couple of friends and I stumbled upon the following installation on Kingfisher Lake in Birds Hill Park, MB. All signs point to it being a movie set, which seems like it could be related to Renee Zellweger’s movie Chilled in Miami that is being filmed in Winnipeg. If this is the case, apparently this is supposed to be rural Minnesota.

It is for reasons like this that I’m really getting into snowshoeing — it lets you go places that aren’t accessible in warmer months, and I seem to see something interesting or unexpected every time I head out (perhaps related to this new perspective).

Check out the rest of our photos here.

On the origins of “bread and circuses”

31 January 2008 @ 3:50 am

In the context of the debate over a Winnipeg waterpark (and its pushing forward despite so many other pressing priorities), I was curious about the etymology of the expression “bread and circuses”. Some wikipedia-ing turned this up, for those of you who are curious like me:

…Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions – everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses.

— from Wikipedia, from Juvenal’s Satire X.

I hate to be that glass-half-empty guy, but it sounds about right for much of society’s relationship with its government these days. I suppose, as they say (to follow one cliché with another), “the more things change, the more they stay the same.”

Manitoban Op-Ed: Fight For Your (Copy)Right

29 January 2008 @ 6:11 pm

My op-ed on fair copyright made it into this week’s Manitoban, the University of Manitoba student newspaper. It should be in campus newsstands tomorrow.

A direct link will be added when available; in the mean time,
Check out the article on the The Manitoban Online, or read on:

FIGHT FOR YOUR (COPY)RIGHT | Protecting Canadians right to media content

Did you know that it’s illegal to rip your own (legally purchased) CDs to your IPod in Canada? That’s right—it’s copyright infringement. Welcome to the sometimes-strange and complicated world of Canadian copyright law.

Copyright is set to become more complicated still if certain industries and lobby groups succeed in influencing the federal government’s copyright reform bill that will likely be tabled shortly after Parliament resumes on Jan. 28. All signs point to a copyright act that will cater to the demands of large content owners: music, movie, and publishing companies otherwise known collectively as “Big Content,” while criminalizing common activities and allowing consumer interests to be trampled in the name of anti-piracy.

It is expected that the big changes to the Copyright Act will be related to technologies that Big Content believes are the major cause of piracy and lost revenues. From photocopiers and VCRs to iPods and BitTorrent, technology has made it easier to use content, exercise fair dealing rights (“fair use” is the American equivalent), and to infringe copyright. To guard against infringement (and fair dealing), Big Content companies have taken a two-pronged approach: adding digital locks (digital rights management, or DRM) to their content and lobbying for laws to make it illegal to circumvent these locks.

These digital locks are objectionable in their own right because they allow Big Content to dictate terms of use for digital content that would be unreasonable for their real-world counterparts. For example, can you imagine not being able to sell or lend a book or CD after buying it? However, when coupled with legislation that outlaws the circumvention of these locks for any purpose, a very troublesome situation arises. Suddenly, even if a user is able to bypass the locks protecting content and intends to for legitimate purposes only, they are legally barred from doing so. It doesn’t matter if they wish to exercise their fair-dealing rights on protected content or if they need to access the locked content they purchased after the holder of the “keys” has gone out of business—all of these activities become illegal.

Such Draconian legislation would certainly upset the balance of rights that is central to copyright law in Canada. While some creators and most Big Content companies and lobby groups believe that protection of their economic interests is the sole purpose of copyright, others (including the Canadian Supreme Court) view copyright as a balance of rights: creators should have the right to compensation for creating new content (a public good), but the public should have the right to reasonably use this content that becomes part of our collective culture. Any new copyright law must maintain this balance.

We can learn about the effects of unbalanced copyright law by observing the nearly 10 years of experience of the United States with their Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Introduced to support content industries in the face of new technology, the DMCA has been ineffective in curbing piracy, yet has restricted user rights, allowed abuse by monopolistic content owners, and enabled ridiculous legal judgments against individuals downloading a CD’s worth of songs—all features that we should be loath to import into Canada’s copyright act. Instead, we must call for fair copyright law that addresses copyright problems while maintaining the balance between owner and user rights.

And what about that illegal music ripped from your CDs to your IPod? You probably won’t ever be arrested because of it, but it highlights the other side of fair copyright: the need for copyright changes to legalize clearly reasonable activity. There are a number of areas in the current Copyright Act that should be adjusted to provide exceptions for reasonable activity in our increasingly digital culture. Again, we must call upon our government to address these areas to ensure that copyright law is fair and accommodating of common consumer activities.

So, what can you do to ensure that Canada adopts fair and balanced copyright law? You need to let your government know that fair copyright is important to you. Start by joining Fair Copyright for Canada (Faircopyrightforcanada.ca), a group of citizens from all areas of society that oppose restrictive copyright law and support fair copyright for all Canadians. This national group and its local chapters are leading the charge against the anticipated copyright changes. They can help you take action to let the government know about the need for fair copyright, including writing, e-mailing, and meeting with your member of parliament, as well as encouraging others to learn more and speak out against unbalanced copyright law.

Canadians cannot remain idle and ignore copyright as another inconsequential law being tinkered with by bureaucrats in Ottawa. Copyright plays a fundamental role in how we interact with the elements that make up our collective culture, such as music, artwork, photographs, video, film, and written works. We must stand up for fair copyright law that maintains a balance between owner and user rights. Otherwise, we risk allowing Big Content to dictate how, and at what cost, we may access the content that defines our culture.

Steve Woodrow is the Fair Copyright for Canada Winnipeg Chapter organizer and an engineering graduate.

Living in a single-serving society

28 January 2008 @ 11:11 pm

A trip through the local Walmart today was a bit concerning. When you run into products such as the Betty Crocker Warm Delights single serving microwavable brownie, complete with a cardboard enclosure and a plastic dish, or Tassimo green tea discs for single serving instant tea, I worry about the future. Especially the tea. Is it too much to throw a teabag and some boiling water in a cup and wait ~5 minutes?

Fair Copyright Winnipeg/MB Group Meetup

28 January 2008 @ 3:08 pm

Six members of the Winnipeg/MB chapter of Fair Copyright for Canada met on Saturday for a solid session of discussing the various aspects of copyright law in Canada, and brainstorming how we want to take action locally. Stay tuned for the activities and efforts that will come out of the ideas developed at this meeting.

Join the group if you want to get involved in taking action locally.

Michael Tyas created this great video of us explaining why we are concerned about copyright in Canada:

Joy Smith Responds

11 January 2008 @ 2:49 am

Back in December I wrote my MP about the proposed amendments to the copyright act. Here is her response:

Friday, January 4, 2008

Dear Mr. Woodrow:

As your Member of Parliament, I want to thank you for your correspondence sharing your concerns about the forthcoming copyright reform bill highlighted in the 2007 Speech from the Throne.

Our government knows it must quickly move forward with the reform of copyright legislation. Copyright reform is complex and the government wants to strike the right balance. Industry Canada and Canadian Heritage have taken into account the concerns of interested parties and we want to ensure that every aspect of reforming the legislation will be properly analyzed.

We have looked closely at measures taken by other countries and will determine if they are suitable for Canada. A bill will be introduced when the Minister is satisfied it strikes the right balance between creators and consumer.

I would be pleased to meet with you to discuss your concerns shortly after the New Year. Please feel free to contact my Administrative Assistant, Debbie at 984-6322, and she will set up a meeting.

Sincerely,

Joy Smith, MP
Kildonan-St. Paul
Manitoba Caucus Chair

It sounded rather familiar, and a bit of Googling turned up this letter from Gary Schellenberger, another CPC MP.

So, while I’m happy I did get a letter back, I’m disappointed (but not surprised) that the sentences were taken from a CPC-approved form letter, and that it contains the same gobbledygook that Jim Prentice has been throwing around. For example:

“Our government knows it must quickly move forward with the reform of copyright legislation.”
This one is my favorite. It doesn’t make any sense. The only parties I can think of that are demanding quick action are the CRIA, etc. and their American counterparts…?

“Industry Canada and Canadian Heritage have taken into account the concerns of interested parties and we want to ensure that every aspect of reforming the legislation will be properly analyzed.”
I haven’t done any original research on this, but from what I’ve read from Michael Geist and others, the last time consultation occurred was in the early 2000s and was later used in preparation for the failed Bill C-60 from our last Liberal government. That was back before the iTunes Music Store, and back before all of the major music companies started dropping DRM.

“We have looked closely at measures taken by other countries and will determine if they are suitable for Canada.”
Heaven help us if they’ve looked to our southern neighbors (or their ambassador) or any other country that has implemented the WIPO treaties and has a life+70 copyright term. Maybe they could look to Israel? It might have a few problems, but it’s certainly better than the DMCA.

I hope to take my MP up on her offer of a meeting. The only problem is that I don’t think we’ll have anything constructive to talk about until the bill is tabled. Any thoughts?

WWRD?

7 January 2008 @ 7:08 pm

What would Rudy do… to win an election?

He would make a commercial that plays on the blind fear and hatred of some Americans. Or incites further anti-Muslim sentiment. Or perhaps even exploits the assassination of a Pakistani leadership hopeful to promote his agenda.

“In a world where the next crisis is a moment away, America needs a leader who’s ready.” Ready to use the fear of a nation to achieve his objectives?

Hat tip to Matt Good for blogging about this video.