It is now illegal to break DRM in Canada!

[forcheville]

So, I'm sitting on the tram this morning on the way to work. The tram stops and a mob of plainclothes ticket inspectors flood in through every door and start flashing their badges and politely asking all passengers for their electronic tickets. These are held up against a sort of Tricorder clutched in the hand of each inspector which informs them whether the passenger deducted their fare when boarding the tram.
One or two irregularities are detected and the inspectors cluster around the embarrassed offenders and electronically lock-in their penalties.
I look forward to the day when the inspectors will flash a badge and take hold of any eReaders being used by passengers, run them past their little Tricorders and seize anyone unfortunate enough to have a pirated or DRM-broken book in their storage and escort them into waiting busses.
There's no reason to limit this to public transport, the inspectors could go into cafes and parks, as well, into any public spaces where people read. And they could check phones as well as eReaders. Or even USB sticks.
It will be a great and wonderful day for the Law!

[ApK]

What is your point exactly? It should be as hard and inefficient as possible to enforce the law?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by forcheville

So, I'm sitting on the tram this morning on the way to work. The tram stops and a mob of plainclothes ticket inspectors flood in through every door and start flashing their badges and politely asking all passengers for their electronic tickets. These are held up against a sort of Tricorder clutched in the hand of each inspector which informs them whether the passenger deducted their fare when boarding the tram.
One or two irregularities are detected and the inspectors cluster around the embarrassed offenders and electronically lock-in their penalties.

Do you find anything wrong with that?

[Cyberman tM]

Originally Posted by ApK

What is your point exactly? It should be as hard and inefficient as possible to enforce the law?

There must be a limit as to how far the "law" can go to enforce the law.
Checking your ticket on a train is one thing. Checking the content of your personal device or luggage while in the public would be another.

Unless they have specific reason to suspect there is something illegal on or in it, my personal belongings have to be of no interest to anyone except myself.

(Obviously, being on the tram is reason enough to ask for your ticket. Possessing an eReader, though must not be reason enough to check it.)

[Laridae]

Originally Posted by forcheville

So, I'm sitting on the tram this morning on the way to work. The tram stops and a mob of plainclothes ticket inspectors flood in through every door and start flashing their badges and politely asking all passengers for their electronic tickets. These are held up against a sort of Tricorder clutched in the hand of each inspector which informs them whether the passenger deducted their fare when boarding the tram.
One or two irregularities are detected and the inspectors cluster around the embarrassed offenders and electronically lock-in their penalties.
I look forward to the day when the inspectors will flash a badge and take hold of any eReaders being used by passengers, run them past their little Tricorders and seize anyone unfortunate enough to have a pirated or DRM-broken book in their storage and escort them into waiting busses.
There's no reason to limit this to public transport, the inspectors could go into cafes and parks, as well, into any public spaces where people read. And they could check phones as well as eReaders. Or even USB sticks.
It will be a great and wonderful day for the Law!

Forcheville is just laying out the plot for his next futuristic novel!

Thanks so much for sharing!

We saw it here first, what an honour!

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Cyberman tM

There must be a limit as to how far the "law" can go to enforce the law.
Checking your ticket on a train is one thing. Checking the content of your personal device or luggage while in the public would be another.

Indeed. I'm a big fan of our 4th Amendment here in the US, along with the rest of our Bill of Rights.

But the post made it sound like it was not one thing and another, but a presumable and inevitable continuation of the same thing.

[Klim Chugunkin]

Just don't buy any DRMed content. Your power as a consumer is to vote with your wallet. As long people happily bend and take it up their pipe nothing is going to change to the better.

[SeaKing]

Well, personally I don't mind the cops stomping the people trying to get a free ride when I am paying full fare. There should have been a heft penalty and then kick them off and make the walk.

[wayrad]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

Well, personally I don't mind the cops stomping the people trying to get a free ride when I am paying full fare. There should have been a heft penalty and then kick them off and make the walk.

Since when is it a "free ride" to maximize the longevity of a product you paid for? Removing DRM for personal use seems about as immoral as waxing the car.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by wayrad

Since when is it a "free ride" to maximize the longevity of a product you paid for? Removing DRM for personal use seems about as immoral as waxing the car.

Pretty sure he was literally talking about the ticket inspectors and the folks trying to get a free train ride.

I'm with you on the DRM thing. I appreciate that IF you break copyright law, then there may be a rationale for also hitting you with a charge of breaking a lock to do it.
But if there is no violation, or even intent of violation, then breaking the lock should not be considered wrong.

ApK

[JD Gumby]

Originally Posted by ApK

I'm with you on the DRM thing. I appreciate that IF you break copyright law, then there may be a rationale for also hitting you with a charge of breaking a lock to do it.

It's just the standard right-wing tactic of making as many parts of an illegal activity their own separate offense in order to artificially up the penalties and so that they have better chances of having at least one charge stick. It's extremely common. For example, if you break into a store while wearing a mask to steal something, you're quite likely to get charged with breaking and enter, theft, vandalism, unlawful tresspass, the wearing of a mask during a crime, and obstruction of justice for doing anything to try and hide your tracks...

[ApK]

Originally Posted by JD Gumby

It's just the standard right-wing tactic of making as many parts of an illegal activity their own separate offense in order to

You mean the left-wing tactic of putting government restrictions on every action, so that no individual has any personal responsibility.

Now can you leave politics out it, please?

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by ApK

You mean the left-wing tactic of putting government restrictions on every action, so that no individual has any personal responsibility.

Now can you leave politics out it, please?

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Michael Geist also says "Under Canadian law, it is not an infringement to possess tools or software that can be used to circumvent digital locks and liability is limited to actual damages in non-commercial cases."

That's from section 41.1 (3): "The owner of the copyright in a work, a performer’s performance fixed in a sound recording or a sound recording in respect of which paragraph (1)(a) has been contravened may not elect under section 38.1 to recover statutory damages from an individual who contravened that paragraph only for his or her own private purposes."

So any case brought in Canada for removing DRM can only recover actual damages. Which are zero in the case of DRM removal from purchased ebooks for personal use.

Grant's comment is not quite correct. Breaking DRM for non-commercial purposes doesn't mean that you are breaking it for personal use. I.e., if you broke DRM and uploaded movies or whatever to a "sharing" site, you would be breaking DRM for a nonpersonal, noncommercial purpose, and thus presumably liable for statutory damages.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Grant's comment is not quite correct. Breaking DRM for non-commercial purposes doesn't mean that you are breaking it for personal use. I.e., if you broke DRM and uploaded movies or whatever to a "sharing" site, you would be breaking DRM for a nonpersonal, noncommercial purpose, and thus presumably liable for statutory damages.

I wouldn't consider breaking DRM in order to make it available as a torrent "personal use".