Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:

Archives

Maybe this CBC iCopyright thing isn’t so bad after all…

One of my commentators in the comments section of my blogpost (who runs Progressive Blogger affiliate Views From the Lake) condemning the CBC’s new licensing scheme with American copyright “protectors” iCopyright has come up with another angle on this business:

I think it’s a great business opportunity. I plan on heavy trolling of the Blogging Tories looking for breaches to report to iCopyright. A million bucks is a million bucks!

This is a very good point. He’s referring to the Boing-Boing article which states that “iCopyright offers a reward of up to $1,000,000 for snitching on bloggers who don’t pay Danegeld to Canada’s public broadcaster to quote the works they funded.”

So there you are, progressive bloggers of all stripes; keep an eye out for Blogging Tory sites who are quoting the CBC’s news articles without an iCopyright license, and report them. See how many of you get a 1 million $ bounty! Talk about a “get-rich-quick” scheme; this surely is one!

(On the more serious side of things, this might be 1 issue that both sides of the political blogosphere can be on the same side as).

14 comments to Maybe this CBC iCopyright thing isn’t so bad after all…

  • ASME

    Well…thanks for your reply. You see I have red hair and actually not bad looking but I have been the butt of jokes and some not so nice jokes because I have red hair. It would show a great deal of respect on your part if you did not refer to red-headed anything….would you use the word nigger? Would you like to be called a stupid canuck because you live in Canada? I was in Scotland on News Years Eve with a group of people and when we arrived back to my friend’s house I was not allowed to enter due to the fact I had red hair…it had to be past 12:00 before I could enter as I was considered bad luck. Red heads are considered that in many, many places including Canada. I refused to stay outside in the cold and was not looked upon very well. You did not have to be so sarcastic with your reply either.

  • Niles

    Just in case you’re serious (despite the fact that combining red haired and racist in the same idea is bemusing since it’s a quality that crops up all over humanity)

    I offer you this from “The Word Detective” — “While we’re on the subject, a phrase I’ve been also been asked about is “beat [someone] like a red-headed stepchild,” meaning “to beat (either literally or metaphorically, as in a sporting contest) severely and thoroughly.” This phrase, perhaps most often heard in the southern US, crops up fairly frequently in various contexts, as does “red-headed stepchild” alone in the sense of “object of neglect or discrimination” (as in “Environmental protection is the red-headed stepchild of the Mayor’s administration”).

    Unfortunately, I’ve yet to find the origin of the phrase. The best guess I’ve seen is that while any child may face abuse or neglect from a step-parent, one with a notable feature (such as red hair) reminiscent of the departed former spouse may be a particular target in such a situation. It is also true that red-haired children are often the butt of jokes by their peers, especially in Britain (where they are called “gingers”), and in several European cultures red hair has historically been considered an unfavorable characteristic.”

    I certainly hope this explanation allays your umbridge.

  • ASME

    Niles….”redheaded stepchild CBC to drag it through the mud unsettling sound.”
    I’m taking umbridge with your remark above about red hair. Your comment sounds racist if you don’t know. Perhaps you could provide an explanation as to why you have used it and what it means?

    • Niles

      Would that be Delores Umbridge of the Harry Potter novels?

      Exactly where are you taking her?

  • Ti-Guy

    Surprise, surprise: It’s all about Mike Brock!

  • Mike Brock

    After our exchange on Twitter, I thought I’d come check out how non-partisan you are. And quelle surprise!

    The very first post is a call to arms to inflict financial damage on Tory bloggers. Nothing partisan about that, no. You’re just doing the same thing the Blogging Tories would do. Tit for tat and all that.

    You know, I’m a libertarian and you could even call me a neoliberal. But the funny thing is, I find more redeeming qualities in blogs like Stageleft and Dr. Dawg’s Blawg which are far to the left of me. In fact, that’s unfair; I think Dr. Dawg’s Blawg is probably one of the top five best written blogs in the Canadian blogosphere, barre none.

    You say that you’re anti-Harper first. Well, fine. Whatever. I’m anti-Harper too.

    http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2009/03/stephen-harper-to-libertarians-youre-naive-and-you-dont-believe-in-personal-responsibility.html

    My anti-Harper rants have been featured in the Toronto Star and Globe and Mail. You know what the difference between me and you is? One of us isn’t supporting another self-centred, power-hungry, egotistical asshole to take Harper’s place.

    • @Mike Brock, You didn’t read /understand our exchange very well, Mike. I’ve never claimed to be non-partisan. I’ve always claimed to be an anti-Stephen Harper partisan, and quite proud of it; that goes back before I was a Liberal when I wrote at BLogsCanada, and when we had our comments section at Prog Blog.

      Again, for someone who claims not to care what I have to say for my hyper-partisanship, you sure are going out of your way to go after me.

    • @Mike Brock, You also didn’t read this post very well either. It was very tongue in cheek.. but that seemed to get lost on you. The “snark” tag should have partially given it away, as well as “on a more serious side of things, both sides of the partisan blogosphere could be on the same side as this” line.

    • Christina Monroe

      @Mike Brock,

      Dude you need to learn what sarcasm is:

      http://www.answers.com/topic/sarcasm

      Partisan or not. The first article Scott posted on this issue.

      http://scott diatribes.ca/2010/01/30/ridiculous-copyright-licensing-no-thanks-cbc-ill-either-just-paraphrase-or-link/

      Clearly states his opinion on the issue.

      Grow up. You threw a twitter tantrum and then chose to attack Scott’s political blog. Last time I checked he was a Liberal, that’s why I read his blog.

    • Jon Pertwee

      @Mike Brock, “My anti-Harper rants have been featured in the Toronto Star and Globe and Mail. You know what the difference between me and you is? One of us isn’t supporting another self-centred, power-hungry, egotistical asshole to take Harper’s place.”

      Wanking with both hands eh Mike?

  • Niles

    I find the offered opinions that this is just one more way for the ‘subtle’ governmental masters of the redheaded stepchild CBC to drag it through the mud unsettling sound.

    I might not, except for the growing tower of precedents in how the Cons have stacked any committee, study group, or NGO they don’t like with suicide aplombers.

    Win-win is not their end game.

  • rww

    You don’t have to do anything. Somehow I think (hope) the CBC didn’t realize what it was signing on to when it signed up for this. It was probably sold to them as free money by the promoters.

    I don’t intend to change my practices. HA HA, now that I’ve said that your all going to be checking my blog everyday till you can cash in on the million dollars.

    It’s too bad though. I thought the CBCs previous practice of highlighting blogs that referred to their articles was a win win for them and bloggers.

  • GAB

    Is this retro active,, do we have to go thru all our old posts and delete all CBC references? That could be a big pain in the dong!

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.