by Mike Masnick
Thu, Oct 2nd 2008 1:36pm
Why is it so often that we find those who strongly push for certain types of draconian laws are later found to be guilty of violating those laws? The latest is a mini-scandal in Canada, involving a plagiarized speech. Now, I've pointed out before that I'm actually all for plagiarizing politicians. However, as Rob Hyndman points out, it turns out that the guy who copied the speech, one Owen Lippert, wrote a book on intellectual property, where he pushed for much stronger intellectual property rules to be included in trade agreements. Of course, it's worth pointing out that plagiarism and copyright are related, but not the same -- but you would think that someone who believes so strongly in more stringent intellectual property laws would be a lot more careful about potentially doing anything that shows a disregard for intellectual property.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Moosehead Vs. Mus Knuckle: The Most Canadian Trademark Spat Ever
- Hillary Clinton Flip Flopped On TPP Before, So Big Business Lobbyists Are Confident She'll Really Flip Back After Election
- Canada Temporarily Drops Out Of Five Eyes Spying Coalition, After Realizing It Wasn't Properly Protecting Information
- Canadian Supreme Court Tightens Up Rules On Law Enforcement's Use Of Cell Tower Dumps
- Judge In Free Speech Case Over Twitter Fight Apparently Fooled By Parody Account