18 Replies to “Cold, Copyrighted Hands”

    1. Can someone confirm if this is legit, what sections of the bill are copyright and what is the justification for ownership?

      Damn, this is good. So if C-71 is truly copyright now, when the RCMP comes to arrest someone can we ask them to show us the law, what about the prosecutor’s. If even the gov’t can’t show us the law, then is it a law?

      This is gonna be damn good entertainment!!!!

      Edit: just did a quick search of CIPO for the term C-71, didn’t come up with any hits. However, as it is a gpv’t database I imagine it might take some time to update.

    2. *
      here’s some law for you, kev…

      the supremes just put this dude back on the street…

      ” A nervous Le fled but he was soon tackled and apprehended
      a short distance away with a bag containing a loaded handgun,
      cocaine and a considerable amount of cash.”

      so, warm up the ol’ bazooka… have a snort and get your
      el chapo on… as long as you’re in your back yard.


    1. The Canadian Supreme Court recently upheld a ruling that states private individuals and corporations may own the copyright of any piece of federal (and provincial?) law that they wrote for the appropriate legislative body. That means they can collect payment from anyone who reproduces the covered law, or deny them permission to do so — treating that portion of law as if it were book of poetry. Details can be found at https://www.restorecsa.com/lawsuit.

  1. The Queen of England OWNS the Canadian government and it’s institutions. It is private property. The Queen of England is above all law including the Constitution. Your comments are not appreciated and in fact express a disloyalty to your masters.

    Canadians are feudal Subjects of the Queen and as such are not entitled to anything including any explanations.

    That is all…Carry on!

  2. “The Queen of England OWNS the Canadian government and it’s institutions.”

    That same condition applies to LONDON… The owners sell a term right for 30 years and then the Title returns to the Lord’s Trust…. Check the history of Harrods… What that does is create a Perpetual (They get to sell it for another 30 years) flow of wealth for each Generation… The Problem in the UK was they were too Stupid to learn how to use a Guillotine… .The UK has been Hooped for 200 years

    The French had the same bull crap… Note the Mohawk treaty that included the Canadian Indians along the Niagara Penn (They were represented by French Indian Affairs)…..It helps to understand the Perpetual wealth system…….

  3. this is, wondrous. I truly hope this bubbles up into the public domain and the dumbset canaduhns have a nationwide wtf moment.

    after that, pony up ye LIEberal supporters!!!!

    this is almost better than when ’eminent domain’ kicked in and one of the US supreme court honchos was a target over some land he owned.

  4. this also in a way resembles the bonanza presented when tranna shitty hall announced cab licenses would be rationed. other shitties followed.
    any Qs what ensued?

  5. Why not copywrite the most utilized parts of the Canadian Criminal Code?

    Can the police charge you with violating a section of the C.C.C. if they don’t own the rights to apply it?
    If they haven’t paid for a “one time use” or however they’d like to license it, how are they able to use it?


    and, I think the above noted guy that appears to have copywrited this Bill C-71 is a friggin genius.

  6. If only registering a copyright were enough.
    Registering a copyright is only documentation of a claim, but not worth anything until defended in court. However, if said person was an advisor that contributed any text at all in recommendations during the consultation phase.

  7. Not sure about a copyright but a trademark takes over a year. This could just be an application fee payment.

  8. Copyright exists from the moment you create the work. Registration is simply a step to declare it.
    Under Manson’s Law, if you wrote a portion of legislation or regulation that becomes law, your copyright covers that portion of the law you wrote. Your copyright predates the passage of the legislation. In fact, under Manson’s Law, you “could” demand payment from Parliament for inclusion of your copyright in the documents issued to MPs prior to a vote on said legislation.