said by jkoblovsky:Also: "Damages becoming punitive" is neither a real thing, nor a defence to copyright infringement"
That's an ideological point of view, just so readers know what you are currently arguing.
It is not - it is the legally uncontroversial wording of the Copyright Act. The Copyright Act (and its regulations) represents the complete law of copyright in Canada (s. 89). All defences available to a defendant accused of copyright infringement are within the Act itself.
I guess I'm out of ways as to how to explain it, but it is simply a matter of fact that copyright infringement is
actionable per se, which means it forms a complete cause of action without proof of harm. Several torts do not require proof of damage to be actionable - libel, trespass to land, battery, etc. Copyright infringement is just one more.
Moreover, courts routinely award non-pecuniary damages without them being "punitive damages" -
a fortiori, calling something "punitive" is not a legally recognized defence to any tort.
