by Mike Masnick
Fri, Dec 7th 2007 2:24pm
Back during the big debate over the need for new laws against "camcording" a movie in Canada, Michael Geist pointed out that existing laws were already perfectly fine in dealing with the problem. Of course, despite all of that, the power of the movie industry lobbyists was too strong and the bill still became law. So, isn't interesting to find out (via Geist again) that a recent arrest for camcording in a movie theater didn't even happen under the new law, but under the old copyright law. So, once again, can someone explain why the MPAA needed that new law and why Canadian politicians agreed to it?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Singapore Court Tosses Copyright Troll Cases Because IP Addresses Aren't Good Enough Evidence
- Artist Sues Church For Moving His 9/11 Memorial Sculpture
- No, The Wall St. Bull Sculptor Doesn't 'Have A Point'
- Nintendo Ended Up Creating A Competitor After DMCAing Fan-Game It Decided It Didn't Want To Make Itself
- Copyright Society's 'World IP Day' Lesson: Give Us Your Copyrights For Nothing