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...
- The Rise Of ContentID Trolls: Dan Bull Has Someone Claim His Music, Take His Money, Issue Takedowns
- Appeals Court: No, You Can't Copyright A Chicken Sandwich
- Carl Malamud Asks YouTube To Institute Three Strikes Policy For Those Who Abuse Takedowns
- Recording Industry Thinks Famous Dead Musicians And Their Personal Struggles Will Get People To Stop Pirating
- Quebec Decides It Needs ANOTHER Hate Speech Law, Only One That's Worse Than The Law It Already Has