Copyright laws have never applied on the Internet. No one in Canada has ever been charged, and the few American cases have not been decided. More importantly, the Intenet has always been a private space. Yes you can identify your own self, you can reveal your identity to your bank, your therapist, or to the whole world if you wish. But if you choose NOT to, no one can identify you. You could, for example, use any open wi-fi to be anonymous online.
However, this new kind of law makes everything you do online traceable to you. And any "artist" who claims, without needing proof, that you have taken from them, can find out who you are and what you look at online. And you can't try to keep yourself private, or you will pay the higher price for using technology to circumvent copyright.
I'd like to suggest that we should be free to use whatever technology we find, to keep our business private, and to find, unlock, copy and share, without fear, anything that is online.
There is not a single legitimate reason to change the Internet to create the systems to trace people, to censor information, and control culture the way that these laws envision.
The power that these systems of control promise to those who would rule over them, will cause power hungry businesses, lawyers, and polititians to lie about stopping crooks and saving jobs, honoring international treaties, and stopping terrorists and pedophiles. But the experts all warn us about this, millions of us have petitioned against this, and even the polititians are recognizing that you can not remove the anonymity from the Internet.
Now before someone named, for example, Simon McDusseldorf chimes in with "Well, I ALWAYS use my real name and everybody else should, too..." My point is that no one, not even Simon himself, can PROVE that McDusseldorf is Simon's real last name. And if we want to start to impose a new kind of system that does prove who everyone is, and what everyone is doing, that system will be DEVASTATING to privacy and a GOLD MINE for terrorists, pedophiles and crooks alike, but will do nothing to eliminate anonymity until you have shut down the very last open wi-fi hotspot on earth.
Nicholas Randall - 13 years ago
While copyright laws do need to be thoroughly examined to determine how they will function in the current age, this Bill is going in the wrong direction. Listening to the suggestions of artists will be key in forming future bills to clarify copyright laws.
Also, many MPs have been saying that artists benefit, when the Bill is focused on benefiting copyright holders. The two are more often than not very different people.
Copyright laws have never applied on the Internet. No one in Canada has ever been charged, and the few American cases have not been decided. More importantly, the Intenet has always been a private space. Yes you can identify your own self, you can reveal your identity to your bank, your therapist, or to the whole world if you wish. But if you choose NOT to, no one can identify you. You could, for example, use any open wi-fi to be anonymous online.
However, this new kind of law makes everything you do online traceable to you. And any "artist" who claims, without needing proof, that you have taken from them, can find out who you are and what you look at online. And you can't try to keep yourself private, or you will pay the higher price for using technology to circumvent copyright.
I'd like to suggest that we should be free to use whatever technology we find, to keep our business private, and to find, unlock, copy and share, without fear, anything that is online.
There is not a single legitimate reason to change the Internet to create the systems to trace people, to censor information, and control culture the way that these laws envision.
The power that these systems of control promise to those who would rule over them, will cause power hungry businesses, lawyers, and polititians to lie about stopping crooks and saving jobs, honoring international treaties, and stopping terrorists and pedophiles. But the experts all warn us about this, millions of us have petitioned against this, and even the polititians are recognizing that you can not remove the anonymity from the Internet.
Now before someone named, for example, Simon McDusseldorf chimes in with "Well, I ALWAYS use my real name and everybody else should, too..." My point is that no one, not even Simon himself, can PROVE that McDusseldorf is Simon's real last name. And if we want to start to impose a new kind of system that does prove who everyone is, and what everyone is doing, that system will be DEVASTATING to privacy and a GOLD MINE for terrorists, pedophiles and crooks alike, but will do nothing to eliminate anonymity until you have shut down the very last open wi-fi hotspot on earth.
While copyright laws do need to be thoroughly examined to determine how they will function in the current age, this Bill is going in the wrong direction. Listening to the suggestions of artists will be key in forming future bills to clarify copyright laws.
Also, many MPs have been saying that artists benefit, when the Bill is focused on benefiting copyright holders. The two are more often than not very different people.