Canadian Gov't Issues Takedown To Newspaper For Posting Section Auditor General Report
from the wow dept
We’ve discussed in the past how silly it is for countries to have “crown copyright” (basically granting the government copyright over government documents). Luckily, the US has no such thing, but it makes no sense elsewhere. The government doesn’t need copyright incentives to create works. The only purpose crown copyright can serve is for the sake of censorship. Canada has a perfect example of that, as the Auditor General issued a takedown to both The Globe and Mail and Scribd, for posting one section of the Auditor General’s report on immigration. The Auditor General claims that to post parts of her report, newspapers (and others) need to ask permission on a case-by-case basis, due to the copyright. Of course, The Globe and Mail is a newspaper, and posted it as part of its reporting — which should be clear fair use/fair dealing (even if there was copyright over this material — which there shouldn’t be). And yet, we keep being told that Canada’s copyright laws are too lenient?
Filed Under: canada, copyright, crown copyright, fair dealing, reporting
Comments on “Canadian Gov't Issues Takedown To Newspaper For Posting Section Auditor General Report”
Wow… it really is Crown Copyright:
“© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2003. All rights reserved.”
Charles and Camilla are here right now, sparking plenty of debate (and plenty more apathy) about the role of the royal family in modern Canada. Apart from the copyright issues, this is sure to ruffle a few anti-Royalist feathers.
Question for a Canadian
In whatever is the Canadian equivalent to the American clause in the constitution regarding copyright, is there anything similar to the “Promote the Progress” qualification?
Otherwise the Canadian govt. might be in the clear here (by law, not ethics, of course).
Re: Question for a Canadian
Copyright is supposed to be an incentive to create. Promoting the progress of science and the useful arts is a patent thing.
Re: Re: Question for a Canadian
hah, who fed you that… the mpaa? riaa?
What copyright is supposed to do, what it does and how it is used so aren’t the same things.
Of course their laws are too lenient. A takedown? We all know that the reporters should simply be thrown in jail (after being accused) for raporism.
Amazing! A public government document is not for public use actually… is not public after all?..
Hey Canada, I’m by NO means (literally) suggesting a bloody revolt, but ever hear of something called independence?
If the Soviet Union can fall with relative ease, by God, your nation should have it’s soveriegnty.
Re: Re:
“If the Soviet Union can fall with relative ease, by God, your nation should have it’s soveriegnty.”
Yeah! In fact, the United States military will help! And when we’re done, we’ll just leave….we swear….
Re: Re: Re:
We’ll just leave 2 dozen military bases and a government crafted in the image of what most ignorant folks here at home THINK our gov at home is… plus an ass-load of our local culture… for like the next 50 years. It’s a good deal, I swear. : P
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wow. Just wow.
I suppose you think we should be isolationist?
Re: Re: Re:
Well since we do import more of our Oil from Canada then anywhere else perhaps a few extra bases are in order to ya know protect our interest!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Okay, not to keep what I only said as a joke going, but I hope you guys know you’re talking about American TROOPS when you say things like this. Troops should not be used to back up our economic interests in sovereign nations.
I have far too much respect for them. I mean, Iraq is one thing, but Canada? Why would you banish them to such a hell…
🙂
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
While they are up there we can teach them the difference between Bacon and Ham … they seem to be confused
Re: Re:
It’s cool most of us here are fine with being part of a commonwealth
@DH: Dude you really do need to get back on the coffee. I know we politically,(from your own statements), and this site doesn’t have to be a love fest, but please.
I had your back this morning on another post. You don’t owe me, but where in that post did I suggest American military involvement? I simply stated, that Canada can always try a non-violent independence movement, through legislation, protest, etc..if they don’t like crown rule. I’m glad you saw my post as an excuse to go after the policies of the US, but it was completely misplaced. NOW you sound like you’re ranting.
Re: Re:
Eh, I went for a funny.
Clearly a swing and a miss….
Re: Re: Re:
I found it very funny. I think it might of actually been a “Whoosh!” on Anonymous1’s part.
EDIT: Should say “I know we disagree politically”.
BTW, I also realize that the more practical, effective solution, is to protest laws like these, and challenge them when incorrectly applied (as I AGREE is the case here, duh).
I was trying to make a broader point about how the Crown is still in control of Canada, AND that one of the ways to lose this control was non-violent resistance, in the form of an independence movement. Get over yourself…
Re: Re:
Oh please, without the Crown Canadians would still be trapping fur and cutting timber as their main sources of income (it’s possible those still are despite the Crown, I’m not sure).
There, that should get a fire started.
Re: Re: Re:
Actually, timber exports are one of our biggest industries (right after the BC pot crop).
Remember when you guys imposed a softwood levy how nuts our politicians went? You don’t remember? It was never reported down south?
Well, we remember…
Here is the follow up, and as we see, the Globe overreacted. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/why-cant-you-read-it-here/article1352225/
Re: Re:
Here is the follow up, and as we see, the Globe overreacted.
Steve, how did the G&M overreact? It still appears they had every right to post the content. The only one I see overreacting is the Auditor General, who seems to think that Scribd means people can modify the document, when that’s simply not true.
OK, Canada wont be invaded by the US, and is capable of engaging in more than the fur trade.
Can we get back to discussing the actual story now?
Re: Re:
“Can we get back to discussing the actual story now?”
Yes, absolutely. I just looked over the link Steve provided above. Apparently the AG claimed the takedown was issued because:
“On the Scribd website, it appears, or it makes it appear, that anyone using the document or accessing the document has an ability to adapt the content and use it in different ways”
I’d be curious as to what this is supposed to mean. Does she think, for instance, that one can alter the document to make her office appear to say something worse than it did? Or is the “use it in different ways” bit including public commentary on how apparently fucked up the Canadian Immigration office is (Hey! Glad to see it’s not just us!)?
We know the difference between bacon and ham. Bacon is strips of pork.
It is just the ‘mericans that call round bacon ‘Canadian Bacon’. (there is no such thing as Canadian Bacon in Canada)
Elizabeth II (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary; born 21 April 1926) is the queen regnant of sixteen independent states known informally as the Commonwealth realms: the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, and Saint Kitts and Nevis. She holds each crown separately and equally in a shared monarchy, and carries out duties for each state of which she is sovereign, as well as acting as Head of the Commonwealth, Supreme Governor of the Church of England, Duke of Normandy, Lord of Mann, and Paramount Chief of Fiji. In theory her powers are vast; however, in practice, and in accordance with convention, she rarely intervenes in political matters.
Re: Re:
Canada is always getting the short end of the stick from those blasted American’s…Canadian Bacon..psshhh
Janene Dalton