dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
22
share rss forum feed


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to static416

Re: Hurt Locker P2P Lawsuit Comes to Canada

said by Michael Geist :
It now appears that the lawsuits are coming to Canada as the Federal Court of Canada has paved the way for the identification of subscribers at Bell Canada, Cogeco, and Videotron who are alleged to have copied the movie. Late last month the court ordered the three ISPs to disclose the names and addresses of subscribers linked to IP addresses alleged to have copied the movie. The ISPs were given two weeks to respond and are entitled to be reimbursed for their expenses.

If I'm understanding this correctly, only clients of some of the larger ISPs are affected?

Rogers, Shaw and wholesale aren't named, which is a little strange. It's like saying if I'm speeding in a Toyota I'm going to get a ticket but if I'm speeding in a Ford I won't.

On another tangent I'm curious to see what recourse affected ISP clients will have; I'd defend myself in court certainly, and I would certainly take my ISP to court if they handed over my IP.
--
I'm watching District 9 again, and I've come to realize something: Wikus's got it all wrong. If I were morphing into a 9 foot tall hyper-dextrous alien that can shoot lightning bolts and get high off cat food why would I ever want to become human again?

static416

join:2007-01-26
Toronto, ON
said by El Quintron:

If I'm understanding this correctly, only clients of some of the larger ISPs are affected?

Looks that way right now. But this might just be the first wave. Rogers, Shaw, Telus are probably next.

I imagine they might pass on wholesale, too small a target. Or maybe they'll use the Bell and Rogers DPI gear to identify wholesale customers. That would almost be a good thing, due the flagrant privacy violation that would create.

said by El Quintron:

On another tangent I'm curious to see what recourse affected ISP clients will have; I'd defend myself in court certainly, and I would certainly take my ISP to court if they handed over my IP.

If history is any example, they will try to get you to settle out of court for some mysterious amount of money on the condition you admit fault and don't talk about the deal. If you fight the case and go to court, they will drop the suit if it looks like you are winning (they've done this in the past) in order to avoid setting a negative precedent.

You'd then have to file and successfully win a counter-suit in order to actually establish legal precedent capable of protecting others. The whole time they'd be fighting hard, stalling, and trying to bribe you to stop to avoid the precedent.

Jammie Thomas is still fighting her suit and it's been like 10 years since Napster even existed.

In reality they are on very weak legal grounds here. An IP is not a person, and infringement of a single movie shouldn't cost the accused $10K. But they win because they have more money than the people they target, and the victims just settle out of court rather than fighting it.

It's not at all hyperbole to call it a mafia-style shakedown.
--
www.LaconicReply.com - Tech/photography/rant blog


Brantford

@primus.ca
said by static416:

But they win because they have more money than the people they target, and the victims just settle out of court rather than fighting it.

It's not at all hyperbole to call it a mafia-style shakedown.

In the US, you can win in court but still go bankrupt paying legal fees to defend yourself against a deep pockets corporation.

As I understand it, Canadian courts typically require the losing party in a court battle to pay court costs and the winner's legal expenses (which is very wise because it discourages frivolous lawsuits).

These copyright mobsters might find that they're stirring up a hornets' nest here.


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com
reply to El Quintron
>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.