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...
- Irony: Sony Pictures Sued For Failing To Stop Piracy
- The Selfie-Taking Monkey Who Has No Idea He Has Lawyers Has Appealed His Copyright Lawsuit
- Security Researchers Sued For Exposing Internet Filtering Company's Sale Of Censorship Software To Blacklisted Country
- Photographer Sues Getty Images For $1 Billion For Claiming Copyright On Photos She Donated To The Public
- Russian Copyright Law Allows Entire News Site To Be Shut Down Over A Single Copied Article