dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
33
share rss forum feed


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com
reply to El Quintron

Re: Hurt Locker P2P Lawsuit Comes to Canada

>Rogers, Shaw and wholesale aren't named

Rogers throttles torrents 24/7. If I were a Rogers customer that got sue, I would use that fact as my defense for not having used torrent.

Also loser pays in Canada, so if there are enough innocent people that stands up to them and not settle, their law suits is going to cost them big time.


CanerisIlija

join:2011-01-19
said by Ott_Cable :

Also loser pays in Canada, so if there are enough innocent people that stands up to them and not settle, their law suits is going to cost them big time.

While this might be true for now, remember that laws can change and people play golf, so don't bank on getting those legal fees back.
--
Ilija - Caneris Inc

jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC
kudos:23
pirating exists because the industry refuses to provide affordable DRM-free content via internet and tries hard to protect legacy medium by sabotaging companies such as Netflix.

The legacy movie industry is like SCO. Instead of adapting, they are turning into an organisation who sole purpose is suing people.

If we had a government that protected our needs, it would reject the lawsuits with a "come back once you have DRM free movies at ffordable price where more than 75% of revenues go to the production company.

static416

join:2007-01-26
Toronto, ON
said by jfmezei:

pirating exists because the industry refuses to provide affordable DRM-free content via internet and tries hard to protect legacy medium by sabotaging companies such as Netflix.

Exactly. I wrote a blog post awhile ago about how piracy is really just a symptom of market failure, and shouldn't be heavily penalized. It's the consumer routing around a greedy and uncooperative corporation. And it's not even necessarily a net loss for the corporation. Even if one consumer doesn't pay for your product, if it's good, he'll tell his five friends, all of whom may buy instead of pirate. That's why Microsoft isn't too rigid about enforcing consumer copyright infringement. They'd rather have you using it for free and contributing to the Microsoft culture, than you switching to OSX or Linux.

If a corporation isn't willing to sell it's product in a fashion that the consumer wants, I don't think the consumer should be punished for finding an illegitimate method to get it that way. I'd pay for movies online if they would let me, but they won't, so I'll get them the only way I can. I'm not going to buy a TV and Bluray player just so I can watch one movie they way they want to sell it.

If you want to penalize me for not following all the rules, I guess that's ok if the fine is $50 for a $5 movie, but not $80,000/song like in the Jammie Thomas case. And there should be due process and law enforcement involved, not just one corporation giving another corporation all my info because my IP showed up somewhere.

Alas, the problem is that both of us are using a thing called logic to win this argument. And in our society arguments are won with money, power, and lawyers, not logic.
--
www.LaconicReply.com - Tech/photography/rant blog


state
stress magnet
Serf
join:2002-02-08
Purgatory
kudos:6

(topic move) gone

Moderator Action
The post that was here (and all 5 followups to it), has been moved offline.