I really like the idea of opting out of IP agreements, but it’s unclear how effective it would be. AFAIU jail breaks are illegal in the US thanks to the DMCA - if Canada produces the kits, it’s still a risk to American farmers/Tesla owners to use them.
And:
But you know what Canada could make? A Canadian App Store. That’s a store that Canadian software authors could use to sell Canadian apps to Canadian customers, charging, say, the standard payment processing fee of 5% rather than Apple’s 30%. Canada could make app stores for the Android, Playstation and Xbox, too.
This requires cooperation from the platforms we’re attacking. The EU had the clout to force Apple to open their platform, but would Canada? Would a bellicose US allow one of their most profitable and iconic companies to do that? Given a choice, I suspect Apple would happily make the “alternate app store” experience so user unfriendly that most users would avoid it.
Android has allowed side loading forever, and has a bunch of non-Google app stores, but they have only gained traction in limited circles.
It’s a fun idea, and it’d be interesting to see how it works out, but I’m not sure it would have a significant impact.
I think you misunderstand: Canada just makes jailbreaking legal. We allow the jailbreakers to distribute their hacks and even sell them.
This isn’t crazy: even if it’s just for John Deer farm equipment it’s a huge boon to consumers.
Sure, Apple and Google will try to make this impossible, but there is a reason they want legal recourse as well as technological.
We allow the jailbreakers to distribute their hacks and even sell them.
I understand that. The target market for those jailbreaks is outside Canada, so distribution of our product would be limited by foreign laws. Foreign buyers would be dissuaded by stuff like the DMCA.
It works for Canadians, but it wouldn’t really affect anyone outside Canada. Given the size of our market, it would have a minimal effect on the sellers of locked products.
even if it’s just for John Deer farm equipment it’s a huge boon to consumers.
Canadian farmers who aren’t part of supply management schemes are in rough shape. As much as it might help them, they aren’t a large market, and (if John Deer cares) the sellers will probably use other monopolistic practices to discourage it.
Sure, Apple and Google will try to make this impossible…
Android app builders regularly complain that their apps are heavily pirated by alternate app stores in China. As far as I can tell, that hasn’t really changed Google policy. If Google is willing to ignore an app market the size of China, I don’t think there will be any real effect from Canada doing the same.
I like the idea behind the proposal, but unless it hurts US corporations, it seems like a small tweak to help Canadian consumers, rather than meaningful retaliation in a trade war.
Apple and Google have also been around for decades. The blueprint to copy the service side of what they offer is not impossible to replicate. Canada probably could not angle to manufacture hardware however, at least not in the practical near term.
Apple would probably setup a subsidiary company, let’s call it Apple Canada, to operate the official app store for Canadian users. They would then funnel that money around the world to get it back to the parent company with little/no tax paid.
And I’m sure Drumpf would be 100% okay with that plan, and wouldn’t retaliate against Apple. /s
NAFTA 2 (and 1) is suspended until tariffs removed. NAFTA 2 (USMCA) did add some IP protections that NAFTA had mostly already. But simple response is no NAFTA rules apply to Canada if US declares fake national emergency to bypass USMCA. It’s not “just” an act of war, it is “unilateral suspension of USMCA” to make war. Canada does not need a national emergency declaration to invalidate USMCA until pig fucker begs to get it back.
Fighting dirty. I like it.
It’s an intriguing idea to ignore American IPs, but then why would American businesses sell their products in Canada at all if IPs aren’t being respected? It also sounds like Canadian consumers would be hindered in the long term because jailbreaking isn’t performed by the majority of consumers (how many people currently use a VPN to bypass Netflix’s region locks)
They might not. But then, most people aren’t going to do things that violate the IP rights in the first place, so they’d be willingly giving up sales.
And they’re welcome to do so.
Most of the decision makers for those businesses voted for this. Let them suffer for it. Forever, if possible.
Can we stop sharing this guy’s every word like he’s an authority on everything? He’s a blogger, not an expert on international relations.
Activist, prolific novelist, EFF organizer and analyst, and then some. Lived and worked in both countries and deeply involved in digital rights and intellectual property policy. Probably worth paying attention on this particular issue.
Also, major exaggeration on the ‘every word’ whinge. He’s prolific and targeting the fediverse.
First, he’s not alone. There was a globe and mail editorial that also boosted this idea, with an emphasis on drug and AI patents.
Second, he doesn’t claim expertise in trade relations; he’s an expert on the recent history of IP and reasonable claim in that.
But frankly, what expertise in international relations is appropriate? Trump is blowing shit up, and does not act like a rational actor. Can you name someone who IS an expert on how to handle this?
The only new thing about this is that it’s coming from the US. Irrational governments have and do exist in the real world and people have been dealing with them for centuries. Maybe look to them for answers instead of the random internet celebrity that has zero experience in the matter.
A blogger and…
Dude has had some fairly prophetic understandings of how thing are headed for years, so he does have some background on a potentially valid pov.
Ah yes, he’s the “Internet prophet”. That gives him credibility.
No, but it gives him a reason to be read and considered. Taking anyone’s ideas just because they said them is… problematic to say the least.
I am just trying to give you a bit more context than you seem willing to find, and, as everyone who has responded in this thread seems to note, you are writing responses that seem bizarrely … aggressive?
I mean, I’m not wed to the idea, nor am I to all the man’s writings, but you seem extremely set against him with no explanation.
Dude has worked at the EFF for a long time and is a published author. How is he not qualified to speak on copyright and IP?
If a hammer suggests using a nail to cook your sandwich, do you think maybe he has a point because he knows nails, or do you consider that maybe he just knows nothing about cooking?
Also, anyone can get “published”. It means nothing.
do you even know what the EFF does?
Also, anyone can get “published”. It means nothing.
you mean like how you publish your comments all over the internet?