Canada’s biggest record label, publisher and management company is helping out a family sued by the Recording Industry Ass. Of America for copyright infringement.
The privately-owned Nettwerk Music Group is intervening, it says, because the songs downloaded and identified by the RIAA by the Gruebel family include Avril Lavigne, a Nettwerk management client. Nettwerk will fund the Gruebel’s defense.
the register
Terry McBride has long been the smartest music manager/label guy in Canada. Now he is going for the continental title. What is brilliant about this is that Avril Lavigne is a huge star and, while the record company which releases her work in the States (and I am assuming it is not Nettwerk) may support the RIAA her management doesn’t.
This is the proverbial sharp stick in the eye for the RIAA because when a guy as wired as McBride says, “”Litigation is not ‘artist development’. Litigation is a deterrent to creativity and passion and it is hurting the business I love”. the register Even the dimmest bulb in the record biz will have no choice but to sit up and pay attention.
Good work Nettwerk
Written by jay on January 27th, 2006 with no comments.
Read more articles on media.
He who must not be linked has taken the first step in suing Ottawa Watch for libel. The offending graf is this rather inocuous passage (and yes Mr. K, I am republishing the alledged libel - I’d be happy to provide your gunsel with my address for service):
And they remember Kinsella was executive assistant to Publis Works minister David “I’m entitled to my entitlements” Dingwall. Kinsella was the guy who foisted Chuck Guite on the bureaucracy. He was a key actor in the sponsorship kickback scandal. And that scandal is about half the reason Paul Martin is on the skids.
ottawa watch
For these pretty straightforward and true words, Mark Bourrie recieved a libel notice letter from Kinsella’s lawyer. He is standing his ground:
There will be no apology.
There will be no retraction.
ottawa watch
Now, other than reaffirming the fact that Kinsella is a jackass, this sort of absurd thinskinedness has no place in the blogosphere.
His lawyer announces,
The clear meaning of the Libelous Words is that Mr. Kinasella acted unethically and/or illegally while Execeutive Assistant to Mr. Dingwall and in his dealings with Mr. Guite.
Alternatively, the Libelous Words, by innuendo, imply that Mr. Kinsella acted unethically and/or illegally while Executive Assistant to Mr. Dingwall and in his dealings with Mr. Guite.
ottawa watch
Now, to Mr. K’s troubled conscience those words, either directly or by inuendo (and only a lawyer could use both terms in the course of a single letter), may imply unethical or illegal behavior; but that is not what they actually say.
“Foisting” is neither unethical or illegal and the record suggests Mr. K. foisted and foisted hard.
Kinsella, in his own testimony before the Standing Committe on Public Accounts stated,
I also stress that we did not do these things on our own. We did them with the assistance of many public servants, including our deputy minister, Ranald Quail; his ADMs, Rick Neville, Jim Stobbe, and Mike Church; and yes, Chuck Guité.
While it may be contrary to the conventional view, we found that Mr. Guité did a good job–as good a job as he had done under the previous Conservative administration. And if it matters, I can tell you that his name never appeared on any of the confidential reports I received from Public Works’ internal police force.
(hating to break my vow) kinsella
Which, of course, would have been a bit difficult for Kinsella to deny as, according to a memo filed at the Gomery Hearings,
A memo tabled Wednesday made it clear Guite was recommended for the job by the office of Dave Dingwall, then federal public works minister. Warren Kinsella, who served as Dingwall’s chief of staff, wrote on Nov. 23, 1995 — less than a month after the referendum — that “recent experience” had shown the need to centralize federal ad strategy.
The same centralized approach should apply to public opinion polling and other communications programs, he said.
Public Works was the logical department to review past practices and put new procedures in place, Kinsella wrote.
“In my view Mr. J. C. Guite … should be assigned to carry out this review on a full-time basis,” he told Ran Quail, the deputy minister at Public Works.
“It is requested that he (Guite) be assigned to a position that will allow him to carry out these tasks.”
ctv
Kinsella worked for Dingwall. Guite was the point guy for the adscam dollars and program. Kinsella was certainly an actor in the scandal, perhaps on the side of the angels and the auditors as he maintains, perhaps not. Bourrie makes no claim either way. Adscam was certainly a large factor in the defeat of Martin.
Bourrie is not wrong to refuse to apologize for true words. Kinsella’s gunsel can issue a writ and, at that point, I - and I suspect any number of other Canadian bloggers - will start contributing to his defence fund. What fun to have a free range look at Kinsella’s files - discovery is a wonderful thing.
Peter Butler, long time libel lawyer for the Vancouver Sun was famous for saying, “It costs $50.00 to file a writ.”
It costs more now but I would be amazed if Kinsella has the stones.
Written by jay on January 27th, 2006 with 4 comments.
Read more articles on Canadian Politics and media.
KMG does an interesting job interpreting Bouquets of Gray’s analysis of the electoral fortunes of pro and anti SSM candidates. It turns out that those fortunes were, more or less a wash with pro and anti being re-elected in much the same numbers.
Grace’s conclusion is:
If Canadians were so hell bent on punishing those known (or suspected) to harbour retrograde notions on the dignity of gay nuptials, they would have rejected Conservative MPs en masse. And they would have rejected the Liberal holdouts in favour of the only party in Canada with a monolithic position on SSM (pro): the NDP. That didn’t happen either.
kmg
My own analysis is that it would have been somewhat surprising to see candidates winning or losing on the SSM issue in most of the ridings in Canada. However, the shutout experienced by the CPC in the three largest metropolitan areas in Canada may have had a little something to do with both the issue in itself and, perhaps more to the point, the issue as a symbol of a general uneasiness with socon positions.
At this point Harper has to pray that the current Parliament in a free vote rejects any revision of the current SSM regime in Canada. The alternative, where Parliament, likely by a very slim margin, votes to affirm “the traditional definition of marriage” will plunge the CPC into a legal battle and political which it neither needs nor is likely to win without invoking the not withstanding clause. A battle in which, God Help Us, the Senate of Canada might well wake up and decide to defend SSM in the face of the CPC government. And there goes the chance of a CPC majority next go round.
If I were a Liberal strategist I might well be looking for ways to ensure that anti-SSM legislation did, in fact, pass in the Commons. Put that particular cat among the carefully lined up CPC pidgeons and see Tory feathers fly.
Written by jay on January 27th, 2006 with 1 comment.
Read more articles on Canadian Politics.
I have yet to meet or serve with a Canadian soldier who failed to impress me with his professionalism and discipline. In my experience — in terms of individual, quality personnel — only Australian troops match Canadians on a one-for-one basis.
Two years ago, I had the privilege of serving with Australian troops in Iraq. The Aussies are crack. In the mid-1970s, I had the privilege of working with the 4th Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group in then-West Germany. In my opinion, the Canadian brigade was the best brigade in NATO, which probably meant at that moment in time it was the best brigade man-for-man in the world.
Today, Canada has too few of these fine troops, and the superior troops Canada does field are not supplied with the modern, first-rate weapons and equipment they deserve — at least, not in sufficient numbers.
The lack of military punch weakens Canada as a global political player, because Canada cannot act with a full spectrum of foreign policy options.
austin bay, tech central daily
While the CPC has made some of the right noises about increasing funding to the Canadian military, it was unable to articulate much of a strategic vision. (Other than the rather bizarre idea of the military in the High Artic - presumably to rattle the Danes.)
It seems pretty clear that the conflicts of the 21st century will be about good intelligence and highly skilled, very well equiped, small units able to deploy quickly and deliver serious force in a very concentrated way. This is not the same as peacekeeping.
It may make sense for Canada to recognize this and build what amounts to a dual capacity. On the one side we need to have a reasonably sized combat force trained up to Special Forces levels and fully equiped for the high intensity, hi tech missions we may find it in our national interest to undertake. On the other side, it would be very useful to have a somewhat larger peace keeping force which was designed from the ground up to be used in civil defence/civil order missions.
Both will cost money; but if we are serious about participating in wrld affairs that is the price of admission.
Written by jay on January 27th, 2006 with 1 comment.
Read more articles on Canadian Politics and International and Uncategorized.