<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OECD counterfeiting report misinterpreted to support myth of Canada as a low piracy country</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.barrysookman.com/2009/11/24/oecd-counterfeiting-report-misinterpreted-to-support-myth-of-canada-as-a-low-piracy-country/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.barrysookman.com/2009/11/24/oecd-counterfeiting-report-misinterpreted-to-support-myth-of-canada-as-a-low-piracy-country/</link>
	<description>Copyright, Intellectual Property, Computer, Internet, e-Commerce Law.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 03:49:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Barry Sookman</title>
		<link>http://www.barrysookman.com/2009/11/24/oecd-counterfeiting-report-misinterpreted-to-support-myth-of-canada-as-a-low-piracy-country/comment-page-1/#comment-63</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Sookman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 23:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barrysookman.com/?p=299#comment-63</guid>
		<description>Thank you for your response.

The reference to the Jupiter Research study did have a link. I am not sure why it couldn’t be accessed. I updated my comment to show it. It deals with music not movies.

I don’t understand your reference to being selective or ignoring facts. I am not aware of any study that suggests that Canada does not have a problem with counterfeiting. Here are some quotes from the reports I mentioned that further describes the problem in Canada:

“The Committee believes that Canada’s border enforcement policies should be modernized to target pirated and counterfeited goods, and that customs officials should be empowered to perform this task. It therefore recommends: That the Government of Canada provide the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and law enforcement officials with the express authority to target, detain, seize, and destroy counterfeit and pirated goods on their own initiative and in accordance with due process and Canadian law.” Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, Counterfeiting and Piracy Are Theft (June 2007)

“A number of witnesses deplored this situation, pointing out that the weakness of our border controls helps make Canada an attractive place to sell counterfeit and pirated goods and harms our international reputation. The Committee was also told that the role of Canadian border officers is limited compared to that of officers in countries such as the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom or in the European Union.” Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, Counterfeit Goods in Canada – A Threat to Public Safety (May 2007)

“The current border enforcement system, manned by disempowered customs officers with no mandate to stop the flow of counterfeit goods into Canada, is wholly inadequate to keep out counterfeit products from countries like China and Russia. The practical result is that Canada has no effective system for enforcing IP rights at the border.” Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network, Report on Counterfeiting and Piracy in Canada: A Road Map for Change, March 2007.

“In Canada, customs officials lack proper authority and are unable to seize suspected counterfeit or pirated goods. According to the Criminal Intelligence Service of Canada, Canada functions as a conduit for foreign manufactured counterfeit goods destined for the U.S. market.” Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Intellectual Property Council, A Time for Change: Toward a New Era for Intellectual Property Rights in Canada, February 2009.

“Canada’s enforcement record also falls short of what should be expected of our neighbor and largest trading partner, primarily due to the following: ineffective border controls, inadequate enforcement resources and policies, and a seeming unwillingness to impose deterrent penalties on copyright pirates.” U.S. Congressional Anti-Piracy Caucus, “2009 Country Watch List”, May 2009. 

“The United States also continues to urge Canada to improve its IP enforcement system to enable authorities to take effective action against the trade in counterfeit and pirated products within Canada, as well as curb the volume of infringing products transshipped and transiting through Canada. Canada’s weak border measures continue to be a serious concern for IP owners.” United States Trade Representative, 2009 Special 301 Report</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for your response.</p>
<p>The reference to the Jupiter Research study did have a link. I am not sure why it couldn’t be accessed. I updated my comment to show it. It deals with music not movies.</p>
<p>I don’t understand your reference to being selective or ignoring facts. I am not aware of any study that suggests that Canada does not have a problem with counterfeiting. Here are some quotes from the reports I mentioned that further describes the problem in Canada:</p>
<p>“The Committee believes that Canada’s border enforcement policies should be modernized to target pirated and counterfeited goods, and that customs officials should be empowered to perform this task. It therefore recommends: That the Government of Canada provide the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and law enforcement officials with the express authority to target, detain, seize, and destroy counterfeit and pirated goods on their own initiative and in accordance with due process and Canadian law.” Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, Counterfeiting and Piracy Are Theft (June 2007)</p>
<p>“A number of witnesses deplored this situation, pointing out that the weakness of our border controls helps make Canada an attractive place to sell counterfeit and pirated goods and harms our international reputation. The Committee was also told that the role of Canadian border officers is limited compared to that of officers in countries such as the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom or in the European Union.” Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, Counterfeit Goods in Canada – A Threat to Public Safety (May 2007)</p>
<p>“The current border enforcement system, manned by disempowered customs officers with no mandate to stop the flow of counterfeit goods into Canada, is wholly inadequate to keep out counterfeit products from countries like China and Russia. The practical result is that Canada has no effective system for enforcing IP rights at the border.” Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network, Report on Counterfeiting and Piracy in Canada: A Road Map for Change, March 2007.</p>
<p>“In Canada, customs officials lack proper authority and are unable to seize suspected counterfeit or pirated goods. According to the Criminal Intelligence Service of Canada, Canada functions as a conduit for foreign manufactured counterfeit goods destined for the U.S. market.” Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Intellectual Property Council, A Time for Change: Toward a New Era for Intellectual Property Rights in Canada, February 2009.</p>
<p>“Canada’s enforcement record also falls short of what should be expected of our neighbor and largest trading partner, primarily due to the following: ineffective border controls, inadequate enforcement resources and policies, and a seeming unwillingness to impose deterrent penalties on copyright pirates.” U.S. Congressional Anti-Piracy Caucus, “2009 Country Watch List”, May 2009. </p>
<p>“The United States also continues to urge Canada to improve its IP enforcement system to enable authorities to take effective action against the trade in counterfeit and pirated products within Canada, as well as curb the volume of infringing products transshipped and transiting through Canada. Canada’s weak border measures continue to be a serious concern for IP owners.” United States Trade Representative, 2009 Special 301 Report</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: North of 49</title>
		<link>http://www.barrysookman.com/2009/11/24/oecd-counterfeiting-report-misinterpreted-to-support-myth-of-canada-as-a-low-piracy-country/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>North of 49</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 08:32:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barrysookman.com/?p=299#comment-60</guid>
		<description>Barry, the least you could do is provide a link to the Jupiter Research study. This is the internet, remember. Honest actors show their work. Oh, and JC was talking about movies, not music.

As for your original post, it&#039;s a slick piece of propaganda but it&#039;s not convincing. Its arguments are based on buttressing a pre-determined conclusion, not on an examination of evidence. The cherry-picking of convenient factoids and sources is so obvious it&#039;s painful. 

Worse, nowhere does it acknowledge any opposing points of view, though it&#039;s obvious from the topics you address that you&#039;re fully aware of them. Finally, it fails completely to provide any substantial justification for its assertions. 

Reminds me of a Fraser Institute op-ed piece, actually.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barry, the least you could do is provide a link to the Jupiter Research study. This is the internet, remember. Honest actors show their work. Oh, and JC was talking about movies, not music.</p>
<p>As for your original post, it&#8217;s a slick piece of propaganda but it&#8217;s not convincing. Its arguments are based on buttressing a pre-determined conclusion, not on an examination of evidence. The cherry-picking of convenient factoids and sources is so obvious it&#8217;s painful. </p>
<p>Worse, nowhere does it acknowledge any opposing points of view, though it&#8217;s obvious from the topics you address that you&#8217;re fully aware of them. Finally, it fails completely to provide any substantial justification for its assertions. </p>
<p>Reminds me of a Fraser Institute op-ed piece, actually.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Sookman</title>
		<link>http://www.barrysookman.com/2009/11/24/oecd-counterfeiting-report-misinterpreted-to-support-myth-of-canada-as-a-low-piracy-country/comment-page-1/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Sookman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:41:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barrysookman.com/?p=299#comment-55</guid>
		<description>Thank you for your comment. A recent study by Jupiter Research http://bit.ly/6iRFb0 has shown that the net effect of illegal file-sharing is a reduction in the sales of recorded music.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for your comment. A recent study by Jupiter Research <a href="http://bit.ly/6iRFb0" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/6iRFb0</a> has shown that the net effect of illegal file-sharing is a reduction in the sales of recorded music.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JC</title>
		<link>http://www.barrysookman.com/2009/11/24/oecd-counterfeiting-report-misinterpreted-to-support-myth-of-canada-as-a-low-piracy-country/comment-page-1/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator>JC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:46:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barrysookman.com/?p=299#comment-52</guid>
		<description>The assumption always is there is lost revenue involved with file sharing. In reality people who do file sharing are looking for value entertainment. Usually people with fixed budgets regarding how much to spend. So it is highly likely if it is made illegal you just put poor people in jail and you will not increase revenue one dollar. People who stop will just go to other forms of entertainment where they get more value for their dollar. In fact this will likely just spur more desire for internet based free entertainment in other forms and help hasten the end of current paradigm in essence these companies will just hasten their own extinction. Currently as it is the internet acts as an advertising campaign for them. The more i see a movie in the theatre being downloaded the more i want to go see it and the current movie going numbers seem to support this rational as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The assumption always is there is lost revenue involved with file sharing. In reality people who do file sharing are looking for value entertainment. Usually people with fixed budgets regarding how much to spend. So it is highly likely if it is made illegal you just put poor people in jail and you will not increase revenue one dollar. People who stop will just go to other forms of entertainment where they get more value for their dollar. In fact this will likely just spur more desire for internet based free entertainment in other forms and help hasten the end of current paradigm in essence these companies will just hasten their own extinction. Currently as it is the internet acts as an advertising campaign for them. The more i see a movie in the theatre being downloaded the more i want to go see it and the current movie going numbers seem to support this rational as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

