The U.S. Digital Millenium act is a lightweight compared to the Candian version they are going to try push through.    OMG - I voted for these guys, I can't BELIEVE they'd write such an anti-Canadian bill.

"Bill C-61: PVRs built in compliance with the bill are not allowed to keep a permanent library of your shows. They will be built with a limited amount of storage and with no backup capability, and just to be safe, all shows recorded on a PVR will be deleted if they are kept for longer than a pre-specified amount of time."

"your DVD of Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle is perfectly legal if you pop it into your DVD player, but illegal if you copy it over to your iPod for viewing on your next business trip."
( ya, also illegal to rip it to Media Center )

ripping songs from your legally purchases CDs, if it has any copy protection whatsoever, on it will earn you a $500 fine per song.   No more MP3's on your MCE (or MP3 player)   No more "My Videos" 

For that matter, most of what Media Center does, is shortly going to become illegal in Canada if there isn't some significant public response to it

This is SERIOUS stuff folks.  

I'm no laywer but when I saw this post I freaked a bit but I looked up the bill and skimmed over it.  Yes the restrictions are there, but there is also a comprehensive section on when the restrictions would not apply.

For example sec 41.17 speaks to an ephemeral recording and also a broadcastor's business requirements.  The way I read it is seems if you hack encryption on your own you're breaking the law, but if you use a product to record content (MCE for example) you should be OK becuase the law has provisons for not hampering business opportunities.  So Bell can sell me a PVR, iTunes can sell me an episode for $1.99 no worries and also if it's for personal use I can record my own and keep it.  What I can not do is store recordings on a network device for sharing.  This sounds OK so far to me but I'm going to keep reading.......

I may be way off here, so anyone who can say more on this would be greatly appreciated becuase this is of particular importance to me as I am considering starting a small business offering home media center solutions.  Lots of opportunity for people selling megabuck home A/V solutions and I see room for smaller solutions using MCE as a platform.  It would suck if my first customer landed me a huge fine.

Not being able to share media across a network would spell disaster for the connected home as we have it today. No more Windows Home Server hosting files across extenders, or a Media Center hosting recordings across extenders. Each room would have to have their own unique "Media Center" with the same capabilities to record and host up music/photos/videos. Imagine ripping your entire music library for every single room in your house you want to listen to music...not cool!

I cannot imagine that there will not be a content protection policy in place that allows for the network storage if the proper "controls" are in place...anything less than that will make me want to move to Switzerland...or Bermuda.

---

AMD Athlon 6400+ BE (watercooled)
Nvidia 8600GTS
Hauppauge HVR-1600
Razer Barracuda AC-1
2GB DDR2
1TB HDD
Vista Ultimate W/ TV Pack

Canada - Bill C-61 is 100% anti consumer.  

You can follow more news regarding this proposed legislation...

http://www.digital-copyright.ca

 

USArcher:

Canada - Bill C-61 is 100% anti consumer.  

You can follow more news regarding this proposed legislation...

http://www.digital-copyright.ca

 

I can understand the fears of Canadians and all.... but I'm sure Canada is not going to start sending Mounties to your home and inspect it for shared media.  In the same manner that when the US passed the DCMA, local and federal police did not start checking everyone's home for violations.

I think in a manner of speaking the sharing of media, ripping dvd's, and ripping music will continue to work in the same manner.  However, if you now get busted selling music, or giving it away, you will have to face the music.   We Americans have penalties under the DCMA, but the only people I've seen get penalized here, were people who were selling reproduced dvd's, and copyrighted material that did not belong to them.

As far as the Television portion, and allowing broadcaster to simply set the NoCopy flag, even if this legislation is passed, I don't see the broadcasters following through.

Why?

It's simply, where to broadcasters make their money?  Advertising.  Now while they do lose eyeballs when people record content and play it back later, some advertising is still shown/seen.  Not everyone remembers to fast forward through the commercials.  Now what happens when the NoCopy flag is set?  People will watch less TV, and less viewers means the advertising monetary return drops, and in result the broadcasters make less money.  From a financial standpoint, it does not make sense for them to do this.  It does however, give them the ability to show full length copyrighted movies, and ensure the content owner, that it cannot be copied.  I would not expect the nocopy flag's to be permanently set.

-D

BTW, Are they still called mounties?  Anyone remember the Mountie from WWF? :)

You know, every time the US government does something like this I keep saying to myself “I’m moving to Canada”. Now where am I going to go?

---

i7 920 | ASUS P6T Deluxe | Triple-Channle DDR3 3x1GB | MSI GTX260 | Seagate 750GB | OCZ 600W Stealth X | LG GGW-H20L| XBox 360 | XBox 360 HD DVD Drive | HDHomeRun | Hauppauge HD PVR | Vista Home Premium

C-61 isn't even law yet, and some people say it won't be. Parliament will rise for the summer soon. If it isn't passed, it will die on the order table. Maybe that's what the government wants. It can be seen trying to appease big business, yet knowing that it wont have to do anything which could hurt its popularity. If there's an election, and the Conservatives get a majority they can reintroduce the bill later

Well, after much reading, here's my take on it.   I THINK that you can time-shift whatever you want (relying on the definition of ephemeral, like you noticed) regardless of the method of protection. 

The language is idiotic.  It reads that you CAN timeshift it.   But you CAN'T timeshift it if the copyright owner gives you ANOTHER way to timeshift it.  WTF does that mean??

You need a lawyer to translate it.

bahh

29.23 (1)
It is not an infringement of copyright for an individual to fix a communication signal, to reproduce a work or sound recording that is being broadcast or to fix or reproduce a performer’s performance that is being broadcast, in order to record a program for the purpose of listening to or watching it later, if the following conditions are met:
(a) the individual receives the program legally;
(b) the individual, in order to record the program, did not illegally circumvent a technological measure or cause one to be illegally circumvented, within the meanings of the definitions “circumvent” and “technological measure” in section 41;
(c) the individual makes no more than one recording of the program;
(d) the individual keeps the recording no longer than necessary in order to listen to or watch the program at a more convenient time;
(e) the individual does not give the recording away; and
(f) the recording is used only for private purposes.


41.17 Paragraph 41.1(1)(a) does not apply to a broadcasting undertaking that circumvents a technological measure for the sole purpose of making an ephemeral reproduction of a work, a performer’s performance fixed in a sound recording or a sound recording in accordance with section 30.9, unless the owner of the copyright in the work, the performer’s perform- ance fixed in a sound recording or the sound recording that is protected by the technological measure makes available the necessary means to enable the making of such a reproduction in a timely manner in light of the broadcasting undertaking’s business requirements.


41. The following definitions apply in this section and in sections 41.1 to 41.2.
“circumvent” means,   
(a) in respect of a technological measure within the meaning of paragraph (a) of the definition “technological measure”, to descramble a scrambled work or decrypt an encrypted work or to otherwise avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate or impair the technological measure, unless done with the authority of the copyright owner; and       
(b) in respect of a technological measure within the meaning of paragraph (b) of the definition “technological measure”, to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate or impair the technological measure.

I'll comment in a condensed manner for the benefit of those who want the hard facts. The PROPOSED Bill provides for the following:

-MUSIC-

Transfer protected (DRM, TPM, etc...) music from CD to IPOD or VMC= NOT ALLOWED

Transfer non-protected purchased music to IPOD or VMC = ALLOWED if you keep the original medium gathering dust forever! You cannot sell it or gash it, unless you wipe out any copies. Also, it has to be Your IPOD, not your sister's or father's or neighbor's

 

- VIDEO -

Remove copy protection from DVD, VHS, LD to copy to HDD or IPOD for personal viewing = NOT ALLOWED

Record (PVR, VMC) TV shows for immediate viewing shortly after = ALLOWED. But you are not authorized to maintain any form of  Library on HDD or CD or DVD

 

- BIT TORRENT -

Completely Unauthorized for protected music, video (movies) or pictures.

 

- FINES -

$500 per song, movie or TV show in a Library

$20 000 for picking protection or encryption on any medium whatsoever. Same fine for using, operating, staring at... a software allowing to carry out the above.

 

Do yourself a favor folks, votre Red the next time around, our freedom to enjoy a decent "connected" home is in Jeopardy I'm affraid...even if you have been walking straight as an arrow since Arpanet (now known as Internet) was first put to use.

so do any of you happen to kow where we can oppose this outrage?
things just keep getting worse & worse.
Will

---

sell business

Hello all you future criminals,dont you see this is just another way that the powers that be are manufacturing criminals to raise money to support god knows what!Those poor slobs we see on TV in handcuffs were ordinary citizens yesterday but the new law ripped them out of their home to pay Bonds,Bail,Lawyers and Judges.Big Brother is in our Homes and there is nothing we can do about it!WE LET THIS HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
              They write laws not to protect us but to lock us up.The Govt is presently upside down.It is controlling the people when its supposed to be the people controlling the govt

now, remind me why we elected the conservatives to power again? This now is not targeted at the infringes of societies - those who steal music of movies - but rather at all consumers who use digital media. They are infringing on well-established rights - timeshift, placeshift, etc. If I buy a DVD, who are they to say I can't break the stupid CSS encryption, rip it to my server, it watch it on my extender I want? This law is not about stopping privacy; it's stopping consumers from enjoying fair use of their legally purchases products. I'd very much like to see what the supreme court has to say once cases work their way up to that level.

So if this bill is passed it is illegal for me to record Dora the Explorer for my daughter to watch it over and over again, correct?  She would be only allowed to watch it once, shortly after it aired.

Does this bill also apply to a VCR as well?

This is just like the Gun Registry in Canada (which cost millions of dollars and has had absolutely NO POSITIVE EFFECT WHATSOEVER, based on the number of gun crimes in Toronto so far this year).  I'm not a gun lover, but really, what good did that do?  Same with this bill, it will restrict the rights of the law-abiding consumer while doing nothing to stem the real problems. 

As far as I'm concerned, the real issue is that the industries producing CD's, DVD's, etc just want to get back to the pre-digital age.  It's too tough for them to actually make things work properly in this day and age, so they don't.

Media Centre or not, if this bill passes, a lot of people will be breaking the law.  Likely, 90% of every household will be breaking the law.  Makes no sense, it's like saying selling cigarettes is legal and then making it illegal to smoke them. So what we have is government trying to stop people from using existing widespread technology. Maybe I'll just ditch the HTPC computer, go back to watching TV via antenna and reading books.  Life would be better!      

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Asus P5E-VM HDMI (onboard audio/video), Core 2 Duo E8200, 4 GB RAM, Hauppauge HVR-1800 (x2), LG-GGC H20L, DMA-2100 (x4), Yamaha RX-N600, InFocus IN76, D-LINK DIR 655, Vista Ultimate