Comments for Supreme Court of Canada Stands Up For Fair Dealing in Stunning Sweep of Cases at http://www.michaelgeist.ca , comment 1 to 78 out of 20 comments http://www.michaelgeist.ca Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:24:12 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-49853 In any PhD program, once you’ve completed your academic requirements, it’s time to write your dissertation. As with all academic writing, much of your success is based on your approach and methodology. So, from the dissertation proposal stage, it is important to get organized and prepared for the steps ahead. The following steps will put you on the road towards success when writing your dissertation proposal.ac training - farhad Sat, 01 Dec 2012 12:19:56 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-49852 Each bond counts as two electrons, and the sum of the electrons in the Lewis structure should equal the electrons in the molecule, as determined by the periodic table. Thanks a lotac training - farhad Sat, 01 Dec 2012 12:17:42 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48486 "there is no evidence from Access Copyright demonstrating any link between photocopying short excerpts and the decline in textbook sales" There is actually evidence to the opposite: See: Does copyright and patent law promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts? Most scholars say no: 1 - An 800-page academic study of German copyright law concludes copyright hinders the proliferation of knowledge and the progress of science: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,710976,00.html 3 - Bill Gates has said: "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today". Bill Gates, Challenges and Strategy Memo. 16 May 1991 http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Patent 4 - Prof. Boldrin and Prof. Levine think that the assumption that IP monopoly rights would promote Science and Arts proved to be a flawed assumption through all history: http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm - JG Fri, 20 Jul 2012 12:28:52 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48393 Heather there will always be that talk on boards, it's just a fact of life, I spoke against it a few posts above. What I would like to point out though is this is one of the most prominent pro-internet boards out there and ANYONE if free to post here without censorship. Try doing that at a copyright maximal site. *cough* johndegen.com *cough* - Crockett Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:15:20 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48389 Calling someone a schill and/or a troll simply because they disagree with you? Seriously? - Heather Mon, 16 Jul 2012 13:48:05 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48367 @Jim: "publishers will drift away from the textbook market, which will reduce the material available. " Definitely. They will abandon publishing and open massage parlors instead. - Napalm Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:51:05 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48366 It almost looks like you got over to Techdirt first, got refuted there and decided to try over here. I won't recap all the talk at Techdirt also an unmoderated site though there's a report button that hides trolls, if you want to see what they have to say you have to click the text on the post. ;-) I would urge people to click the link, what Andrei thinks is fair is eternal copyright and a clear fixation on the old Soviet Union, as if that has a thing to do with Canada. - John Wilson Sat, 14 Jul 2012 20:32:55 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48365 @The Dirk "However, these decisions make clear what some of us have known for a long time: the CB does not act in the interest of Canadians, but of copyright collectives..." I have thought the same thing myself, of course those concerned with maximal copyright would always point to the Copyright board as an impartial arbitrator. One only has to look though at their rulings to see that they most often come out more on one side than the other. It is illustrative that those same people who held the CB decisions in high regard are now bemoaning the recent decisions of the Canadian Supreme Court. - Crockett Sat, 14 Jul 2012 12:20:33 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48364 Further on the K-12 case. I fail to see how this decision would lead to a significant decline in textbook sales in either K-12 or post-secondary. This doesn't enable copying of whole, or even half of, textbooks to use in class. Schools will still buy class sets and stock their libraries. College and university profs will still assign course texts and their libraries will still buy books and license all manner of databases. What likely changes is that AC doesn't get their money. Yes a bit of that does end up at publishers and that part of their revenue stream will shrink, but that has to be a very small part of their total revenue. When I think of the money from the college I work at that goes to publishers in the form of textbook sales and library expenditures, the AC model license fee would be a small percentage (5%?) of that amount. After AC skims their healthy portion off, the publishers are only getting what two or three percent of their total college based revenue via AC? I can't imagine it being that much different in K-12. If they go bankrupt it's not this decision that will cause it. - The Dirk Sat, 14 Jul 2012 11:29:41 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48363 In these cases, the SCC is overturning the decisions of the Copyright Board, not just unilaterally imposed fees by SOCAN, etc. That points to a significant problem beyond the often cited greed of SOCAN, Access Copyright, etc. The Copyright Board (CB) is supposed to regulate these collectives and protect consumers, students, etc. However, these decisions make clear what some of us have known for a long time: the CB does not act in the interest of Canadians, but of copyright collectives (think of the recent dancing tax at weddings approved by the CB in addition to these cases). What Canadians need to do is pressure the government to reform the CB. Average Canadians can't afford the legal fees to challenge the collectives at the CB, but we need fair and balanced representation at the CB. So the govt needs to either reform the CB or fund an advocacy/ombudsman type group to represent Canadians at the CB. - The Dirk Sat, 14 Jul 2012 11:12:34 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48362 Access Copywrong! Haw Haw! - Big Al Sat, 14 Jul 2012 10:01:51 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48357 You are right, there is plenty of creative value that can be be added to textbooks to make them more effective teaching tools. - SMR Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:41:29 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48356 SMR, Not all the stuff in textbooks are factual knowledge, some falls into the creative sphere. Also the actual layout and presentation is a work in itself. Other than that I think your comments are well said! - Crockett Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:20:45 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48355 The purpose of copyright is to promote the creation of creative works for the benefit of society. No where does it say that creators or distributors of creative works should get wealthy from it. In fact, extensive copyright works to the detriment of society because creators don't need to create more, they just need to create a few works and then collect royalties for the rest of their life. Unfortunately, it seems that much of the time creators are not the ones that benefit from copyright. It seems that publishers and distributors are the ones that benefit from greater copyright protection. As gatekeepers to the methods of distribution, in the past, they have made unfair deals with creators that give them a disproportionate share of revenue from the distribution of such works. Society does not owe distributors anything at all. There is no benefit to society from excessive profits made by distributors. Any excessive profit made due to a law that gives disproportionate income to distributors is a monopolistic profit (economic rent) and is detrimental to society. It is detrimental because the resources, people who are non creators and money in excess of the true cost of printing and distribution, could be used in more productive ways to the benefit of society. Since distribution is now easier and new, innovative companies now distribute some creative works, it is likely that traditional distribution will be a smaller industry. Thus investors, manager and employees who are no longer needed should find new things to do. It is also best that buyers of creative works do not overpay the distributors and instead use their money to buy other goods and services. They can then buy more creative works, which will benefit the actual creators, or they can buy other goods and services. Maybe the former distributors will create new products and services that the people can then buy with their saved money. It is this re-allocation of resources that will benefit society the most. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_rent Textbooks are compilations of factual knowledge which is not subject to copyright and thus should cost little more than the cost of paper and trucking. Any amount more is economic rent. Schools should really specify what they want in a textbook and then ask publishers to compete to produce it at the lowest price. - SMR Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:03:02 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48354 @Andrei "...mythical "user rights"? I could be wrong but are not the exceptions listed in C-32 rights given to end users (such as shifting, backup, mashups etc)? Never mind for the moment that they were taken away by your right to lock it. Copyright has purposes other than giving you control over your work, it is also to enrich society. - Crockett Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:53:02 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48353 "US schools operate under quite narrow copying guidelines"Sorry Jim, when I read this, "narrow copying guidelines" to me sounds like "strict" copying guidelines. Hence, you can see why I was confused. - Eric L. Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:23:43 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48352 I think the bigger concern is that the SCC is taking on a role that belongs to Parliament. This is what Justice Rothstein was getting at. And it's fine to hail the outcome when you agree with it, but except when legislation is unconstitutional, the courts are actually supposed to apply the law as written, not what they'd like it to be. And absent a constitutional basis for the copyright decisions, this was a very dangerous path for the SCC to take. - Jim Fri, 13 Jul 2012 17:36:01 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48351 Here's the short link: http://bit.ly/Nzp76Y - Andrei Mincov Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:10:56 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48350 This victory is akin to the victory of the bolsheviks burning the palaces of the rich. The problem with individual rights is that once you start destroying them, there is no stopping. First the government takes away your property (through taxation and creating limits to what you can do with your property), then it takes away your freedom (through mandatory licensing and institutional political correctness), then it goes for your life. There is no such thing as partial recognition of individual rights. There is no compromise between food and poison. There is no compromise on principles. There is no compromise on recognizing the right to control the use of one's works and the mythical "user rights". I write about this in more detail at http://mincovlaw.com/blog-post/supreme_court_of_canada_delivers_a_mighty_blow_to_copyright_and_freedom_in_canada today... Very sad day indeed. - Andrei Mincov Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:03:56 +0100 http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6588/125/#comment-48348 Hi Jim, though we may disagree on some points don't let the others scare you off with troll talk. One thing I really appreciate about this blog is it is not moderated by user and all opinions are welcome (at least by some). One sided discussions are very boring. - Crockett Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:01:33 +0100