Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Music Industry Loses In Canadian Downloading Case

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the land-of-the-free-once-removed dept.

Privacy 736

pref writes "'Canada's music industry can't force Internet service providers to identify online music sharers, a Federal Court judge has ruled.' They wanted the Internet service companies like Sympatico, Rogers and Shaw to give them the real identities of the individuals so they could sue them for copyright infringement. They were seeking a court order requiring the companies to provide the information. But they didn't get it, so the Internet companies don't have to identify their clients and the music companies can't proceed with their lawsuits.""

cancel ×

736 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

wow (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728102)

wow

Great! (-1, Redundant)

Argonath (679076) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728103)

That sounds good!

Canadians Are Evil (5, Funny)

monstroyer (748389) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728106)

Of course Canada, a socialist country harboring terrorists, would have a judge corrupt enough to *not* allow the law to break down the doors (and backs) of pirates. The whole country is a cesspool of leftist anti-american pot smoking jocks. Half their salaries taxed and for what? Medicare, Infrastructure, Social Programs, and Freedom? Give me some good old fashioned blatant class differences based on race any day of the week. We need to buckle down and attack these northern communists ASAP. Axis of evil anyone? Downloading music is the first step to the downfall of America, we must stop them at all costs. I have a gun and i'm on my way!

A better CAPTCHA solution?
Sunday March 14, @02:10PM
Pending

To CAPTCHA or not to CAPTCHA?
Saturday March 13, @06:12PM
Pending

Why Don't I Have a Girlfriend?
Saturday February 07, @10:22PM
Pending

Re:Canadians Are Evil (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728157)

Really...what kind of tool are you? Is this supposed to be an attack on socialism or simply proof that you have your head up your ass? Sweet jesus...

Re:Canadians Are Evil (4, Funny)

jjohnson (62583) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728222)

*whoosh*

Re:Canadians Are Evil (0)

Kevin Mitnick (324809) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728269)

See dear AC, there's this little thing called sarcasm.. I'd look into getting your sarcasm detector fixed

Re:Canadians Are Evil (5, Funny)

jjohnson (62583) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728252)

Oh please... we are not *jocks*.

Re:Canadians Are Evil (0)

arsenix (19636) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728271)

slashdot enclave in canada? who's with me?

Re:Canadians Are Evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728279)

Yeah, you and "Dr." John Grubor.

Re:Canadians Are Evil (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728308)

Yeah, and those left-wing pinkos have a LIBERAL [liberal.ca] government! It's right there in the title "Liberal Party of Canada"! They don't even deny it, much less try to hide it, as any sane people should.

And right on our continent, too! How can we allow this to stand?

Re:Canadians Are Evil (4, Funny)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728342)

But I thought it was America's duty to liberate people? Now I'm just confused!

Re:Canadians Are Evil (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728352)

Sorry for correcting you,

Canadians are boring, you already named the rasons why they allow these kind of attrocities happen, if judges in Canada take away the right to infringe copyrights laws (which apply around the world somehow), commerce with pot and harbor potential terrorists, they all would be moving to america (as they do nowadays), give the baby their bottle and keep them contained else you'll be adding more problems to the always envied America.

Sieg Hail Canada Sieg Hail!!!!

Hooray! (5, Insightful)

Vargasan (610063) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728107)

Hooray for Canada.

Wait... Which country was the 'Land of the Free' again?

Re:Hooray! (5, Interesting)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728164)

Good for Canada! I don't really think it's an ISPs business to get involved in civil matters between outsiders and their clients. If I ran an ISP in this day and age I would keep my radius and/or DHCP logs for 24-48 hours. If RIAA can't subpoena me in that amount of time that's their problem.

Does anyone know what the outcome of the similar case in the US is? Last time I heard anything the appeals court had reversed the lower court decision -- so RIAA started suing IP addresses (some of which weren't in the US as I recall). Was there any resolution to this or is it still in litigation?

As an aside I don't really think it's the business of an ISP to hide their customers when they break the law either. I just think RIAA should be held to a higher burden of proof then just giving a judge (or a clerk) an IP address and getting the name of that customer. They should actually have to prove that IP address was engaged in illegal activities. Does anyone here really think they can do that for each and every file sharer? If this was held to a real burden of proof these cases would stop tomorrow.

I wish somebody would have the backbone to actually fight one of these instead of rolling over and settling. It's basically going to come down to "He said"/"She said". Sure RIAA says I was sharing files -- can they prove it with the testimony of a neutral third party? Somebody they are paying to find people on P2P networks hardly qualifies as neutral.

In that case... (1)

warrax_666 (144623) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728274)

If I ran an ISP in this day and age I would keep my radius and/or DHCP logs for 24-48 hours.

In that case you might be the one breaking the law. Where I live, any ISP is required by law to keep such logs for at least a month.

Don't celebrate yet. (5, Interesting)

Liselle (684663) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728219)

Well, I RTFA (someone reply with "You must be new here" for your free +5 Funny), and it doesn't look to be a cause for celebration. It seems as if they didn't present compelling enough evidence to the judge.
"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies onto shared directories on their computers which were accessible by other computer users via an online download service," the judge wrote.
I'll wager that once the Canadian recording industry gets its wagons in a circle, they are going to try again. Regrettably, one failure won't stop them.

Re:Don't celebrate yet. (5, Funny)

chimpo13 (471212) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728323)

someone reply with "You must be new here" for your free +5 Funny

Okay, I'm game. You must be new here.

I'll turn off my karma bonus (all due to goatse links), and see what happens.

Re:Don't celebrate yet. (1)

Vargasan (610063) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728329)

Read that small part of the article you copied & pasted.

Now. Tell me how they'll get that proof.

"They merely placed personal copies onto shared directories on their computers which were accessible by other computer users via an online download service."

That's so sad! (5, Funny)

neiffer (698776) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728110)

I was hoping to get sued in Canada instead of the States. After the exchange rate, I was hoping to pay about $0.78 per song, beating the iTunes price!! :)

So wait a minute (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728113)

Comprehensive health care, weed is basically legal, and the music industry has lost!?!?! Why do we pick on Canada again?

Re:So wait a minute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728163)

Why do we pick on Canada again?


Socialized health care. Legal access to addictive drugs. Poor support for intellectual property protection.

Re:So wait a minute (1)

bobjohnson (574277) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728234)

I still don't buy the idea that socialized health care is a bad thing. I mean how many americans don't have health care period? With the downsizing of Corporate america healthcare is one of the first benefits to be lost. How can anyone argue that by the government controlling (as ideally as possible, of course I realize the detriments possible) that tax money should not care for the 'Health' of the citizens?

Re:So wait a minute (3, Insightful)

strike2867 (658030) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728307)

Legal access to addictive drugs

Well its now 10am and Im on my 5th cup of coffee. Time for my cigarette break.

Socialized health care.

Ohh crap. Tripped down stairs. Leg hurts like hell. Time to go to a doctor.

Me: My leg hurts.
Doctor: Stay off it.
Me: How much do I owe you?(after paying bill I apply for Chapter 11)

Re:So wait a minute (5, Insightful)

RetroGeek (206522) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728314)

Legal access to addictive drugs

What, you cannot buy cigarettes where you live?

Re:So wait a minute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728285)

Jealousy.

Awesome. (3, Insightful)

danhm (762237) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728117)

I think I know what country I'll go to college in now.

Re:Awesome. (1)

gagy (675425) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728389)

I think I know what country I'll go to college in now.
Not only that, but as a citizen, I pay under $2500(CDN) per semester of university, if you're not a citizen, double that, but still hell of a lot cheaper than in the US! :)

Legality? (1)

r84x (650348) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728119)

So, it is now legal to download music, since they can't prosecute you? So can I download from a Canadian server? If a canadian downloads from me, is it ok? Or is this just another ruling that the music industry will find a way around?

Re:Legality? (1)

Pulse_Instance (698417) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728168)

Actually in Canada it is completely legal to download music, this has been said many times before here.

Re:Legality? (4, Informative)

Cruciform (42896) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728345)

Yup, it's legal to download, but redistribution is still a no-no. So you have to force your client software into a 'leech-only' setting to remain within the law.

Still, this doesn't mean Canadians will be able to get off scott free when it comes to downloading music and other media. The storage media levies that get put in place may be quite substantial, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a "study" result in a claim that people that use greater than X amount of bandwidth a month are more likely to be pirating and therefore should incur additional levies.

On the plus side, Canadians are less likely to be robbed at gunpoint for their iPod full of tunes. ;)

Re:Legality? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728178)

So can I download from a Canadian server? If a canadian downloads from me, is it ok?

Use a proxy and circumvent the system.

Re:Legality? (2, Insightful)

damian.gerow (458051) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728265)

All the judge said was that the people sharing the music weren't committing any illegal acts. And depending on how you read Canada's copyright law, it may even be legal to download songs via P2P networks. It'll be interesting as this law is put to tests -- if the network traffic passes through the States, does it then become subject to American law? What if one person is in Canada, and the other isn't?

Re:Legality? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728318)

It is legal to download music in Canada.
It is illegal to upload music in Canada.
Apparently, Canadian ISPs can not be forced to disclose the identities of uploaders.

Re:Legality? (1)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728353)

I do not think they are saying its legal to download pirated material, I think they are saying they will not divulge private information to corporations. I think, however, if you get caught downloading in Canada you are still hosed. And if you live in the US and download from Canada, you are dealing with some other laws that would probably make it worse -Avi P.s. Just dawned on me - what if the music companies, who are viewing these lists of peoples names, phone numbers, age, address, credit card info, etc... are now signing them up for junk mail....

good (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728121)

That'll teach 'em commie scum!

Dion or no.. (4, Funny)

Borg453b (746808) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728124)

Dion or no Dion - I'm moving to Canada :D

Re:Dion or no.. (2, Funny)

xarak (458209) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728228)


Don't go! They've also got Bryan Adams and Shania Twain!

And beware the howl of the Furtado - very few who heard it's wail lived to tell the tale.

Re:Dion or no.. (1)

Borg453b (746808) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728284)

Haha - the howl of the Furtado .. that brought tears in me old eyes.

I'm now officially your fan. Thank you :D

Re:Dion or no.. (1)

RichMan (8097) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728331)

We exported Celin Dion to Nevada. We can barley here her now.

Actually both Celin Dion and Shania Twain are residents of Switzerland now. They will take our ticket/CD money but they don't want to pay us back through the taxes.

Canadian Amusement (need media player):
Spoof of an old Ontario government promotional song
"Ontario, A place to live, a place to grow"
Rick Mercers Monday Report [www.cbc.ca]
Background: an abandoned brewery in Toronto was found to be a large pot growing operation. The CBC is government funded in part.

Woo! Proxy Time (3, Insightful)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728125)

C'mon you Slashdotters in .ca, how about setting up some anon HTTP proxies so that the rest of us can download freely? Your ISP logs can't be subpoenad, so we can all download stuff via your pipes, and the Evil Record Companies can't do anything!!!

Re:Woo! Proxy Time (1)

Pulse_Instance (698417) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728253)

The reason they don't have to give our names away is because we already pay for the music, whether we download it or not.

Re:Woo! Proxy Time (-1, Flamebait)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728324)

Sucks to be you, living in a socialist country and all. I knew there was a reason you were in my foe list.

Re:Woo! Proxy Time (2, Interesting)

BdosError (261714) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728263)

Actually, it's only legal to download in Canada. Uploading is illegal.

As others have said, this case (RTFA) doesn't deal with this, it's more about the music industry not having sufficient proof of infraction to compel the release of the names.

Awesome! (1)

_Sharp'r_ (649297) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728126)

Nice to see privacy winning one for a change.

Now if we can get the U.S. Supreme court to rule the same way.

After all, they've been using foreign court rulings more and more recently.

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728337)

It's funny.. on first glance I read

"Nice to see piracy winning one for a change."

which sort of works too.

You guys (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728128)

All you guys make like $100k a year. You spend more on computer stuff than your own health. But you just have to steal music.

How sad is that?

Downloading Music (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728129)

Downloading Music. What's it all about? Is it good, or is it whack?

OH Canada. (1)

Deflagro (187160) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728138)

Glad to see that this can be faught somewhere. Really though, the question is... How long can Canada do this before they get pressured to follow in their oppressive neighbors' lead?
I wouldn't rejoice too quickly, but it's nice to see.

P.S. Eat it RIAA! ;)

Re:OH Canada. (1)

danhm (762237) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728288)

The Recording Industry Association of America is unaffected by this ruling.

Go after the IP (5, Insightful)

grafikhugh (529618) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728140)

What is to stop them from suing the IP number and using the court case as a means to identify the user? Didn't the RIAA have to take that aproach after losing a similair lawsuit ?

Re:Go after the IP (3, Insightful)

netfool (623800) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728226)

Its in the article - "No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies onto shared directories on their computers which were accessible by other computer users via an online download service," the judge wrote.

Re:Go after the IP (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728291)


Canada's latest round of privacy laws, introduced in January of this year, will stop them. Read about it here [privcom.gc.ca] . In fact Canada has a Privacy Commissionaire who fights for the peoples' privacy.

Re:Go after the IP (2, Insightful)

nuckfuts (690967) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728325)

The majority of subscribers here in Canada use dynamic IP addresses. Last time I checked it wasn't even possible to pay for a static IP from Shaw. So unless ISP's can be forced to go through their DHCP logs and figure out who was assigned a particular address at a particluar time (which is what just failed to happen in court), knowing the IP address is useless.

From the Judge: (4, Insightful)

big_groo (237634) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728348)

From The Toronto Star [thestar.com] : "No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings," von Finckenstein wrote in his 28-page ruling. "They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

He compared the action to a photocopy machine in a library. "I cannot see a real difference between a library that places a photocopy machine in a room full of copyrighted material and a computer user that places a personal copy on a shared directory linked to a P2P service," he said.

Besides, the IP changes, and the ISPs *don't* have to divulge who had the IP at any given time. Kind of hard to sue in that case...

Don't even think it (2, Insightful)

SlartibartfastJunior (750516) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728141)

"Until then, Canadian online music traders are free to keep swapping songs, Akin said."

Um, but aren't they facing the chance of being sued anyway? So yes, you can go back to swapping songs, since nobody has been sued YET - but that doesn't mean you aren't leaving yourself open to it when they get their act together.

Re:Don't even think it (5, Informative)

jemartin (636867) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728182)

According to the CBC [www.cbc.ca] , the Judge ruled that file sharing is within the bounds of Canadian copyright law.

Specifically, from the Judge's ruling: "No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

Toronto Star's version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728158)

The Toronto Star [thestar.com] has the story as well.

Woo Canada! (3, Interesting)

Jonas the Bold (701271) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728159)

As an American living in Canada, I feel good about this. The main benefit from living in Canada I've found so far is just a lower stress level. The people at the wheel seem saner, more composed and less twitchy, it doesn't seem as absolutely imperative to pay attention the news, that sort of thing.

Stuff like this only helps.

Re:Woo Canada! (4, Funny)

s20451 (410424) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728218)

The people at the wheel seem saner, more composed and less twitchy

I guess you don't live in Quebec, then?

Re:Woo Canada! (1)

hysma (546540) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728327)

The people at the wheel seem saner, more composed and less twitchy,
Aha, so my fear of driving south of the border does have a basis other than my own personal bias... Thanks for the confirmation :)

Hahahah... (4, Funny)

Frennzy (730093) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728160)

Too bad for the R I Eh Eh, Eh?

Hosers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728165)

yet ANOTHER reason to move to Canada.... aigh

Another Article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728167)

The Toronto Star ( http://thestar.com ) has an article on their front page as well.

Actually, the ruling means a bit more (4, Informative)

salemnic (244944) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728170)

Another Source [canoe.ca]

This ruling not only means that the CIRA can't get user information from the ISPs, but that file swapping in Canada does not even infringe on copyright - it's completely legal.

If you're Canadian, that means a big weight off your shoulders, for now.

but... (0, Offtopic)

ambienceman (721763) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728172)

i thought the mounties rode around on horses...

Re:but... (2, Funny)

RedCard (302122) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728259)

i thought the mounties rode around on horses...

When they do, it's usually part of a show.

Or crowd control. People get out of a horse's way, most of the time.

Error in Title (5, Informative)

Dashing Leech (688077) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728174)

It's not a "downloading" case, it's an "uploading" (distribution) case. Downloading is legal [drmwatch.com] in Canada.

Here's the CBC's take on it... (3, Informative)

jaraxle (1707) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728185)

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/03/31/canada/downlo ad_court040331

Contains a few links to older information about the story and whatnot.

~jaraxle

Good judges (4, Informative)

flossie (135232) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728189)

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies onto shared directories on their computers which were accessible by other computer users via an online download service," the judge wrote.

So this is what happens when you have tech-literate judges! Where can we get some from?

Re:Good judges (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728295)

He compared the action to a photocopy machine in a library. "I cannot see a real difference between a library that places a photocopy machine in a room full of copyrighted material and a computer user that places a personal copy on a shared directory linked to a P2P service," he said.
Makes sense to me. But, what if someone from another country makes a photocopy of a Canadian copyrighted book, aren't they going to be stopped crossing the border?

CD-R/DVD-R/Tape/Video tax (1)

hysma (546540) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728196)

Looks like the blank media tax shinces through. Even though I own all the music I listen to, and use DVD-RWs for weekly server backups, it seems if I wanted to, I can download music without fear! Thanks Courts!

I dont think this is over by a long shot (1, Interesting)

arock99 (612650) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728197)

Taking a look at the history in the US with the RIAA I highly doubt we have seen the last of this. The biggest problem the RIAA faces with Canada is they are already getting royalties for every blank CDs purchased and therefore only have legal grounds to sue people who share and cannot touch those who simply download the music. But hey i'm no lawyer so what do I know :)

gay married music pirates! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728198)

wow! i can get married AND trade music files?? WOOOT! I'm moving to canada!

business idea (1)

Lord_Dweomer (648696) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728200)

So what exactly would stop someone now from sending an order from the US to a Canadian company for a cd with 700mb of mp3s on it, have them fill the order and mail it back?

CBC also has an article. (1)

Devastator (44460) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728204)

Checkout CBC's Article [www.cbc.ca] for another view of the story.

Welcome to Canada (1)

Drew Sullivan (5357) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728206)

Please check your gun at the border.

RIAA Dodgers (1)

Graemee (524726) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728210)

First we had long haired hippie US draft dodgers, now with this we'll be host to a bunch of greasy haired, geeky RIAA dodgers

be competitive or die (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728212)

The music industry must realize that sticking it to the common joe is not going to improve their revenue, the music industry is sinking in repetitive patterns and always looking for the easy buck.

The music industry must recognize the depression the world is in these times, when a good bunch of the population only have McJobs you can't espect them to have the adquisitive power to buy any crap you throw at them.

Favourite qoute from a similar article (5, Insightful)

oblivionboy (181090) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728214)

In a related article from canoe.ca [canoe.ca] , the judge was qoute as saying,"I cannot see a real difference between a library that places a photocopy machine in a room full of copyrighted material and a computer user that places a personal copy on a shared directory linked to a P2P service,"

Doesn't this analogy actually make more sense, than alot of the analogies to "theft" that the record industry has thrown out?

On the other hand, it may not be that valid, because to actually photocopy an entire book would be prohibatively expensive. Where as with P2P whether you download an entire album or just one song its the same cost. Free.

Re:Favourite qoute from a similar article (1)

maddskillz (207500) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728351)

But the library does have to pay copyright fees to CanCopy, and is supposed to enforce the rules of CanCopy

Judge: File swapping not illegal (3, Informative)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728215)

The Canadian Press [canoe.ca] version of the story really slaps it to the record industry. Quite a different focus to it. Have to read all ofthem and boil them down to get the real facts.

Other newsfeeds (5, Informative)

damian.gerow (458051) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728216)

Two other newsfeeds are carrying the story as well -- both say essentially the same thing, but CBC has some related stories that may be worth reading: The Toronto Star [thestar.com] and CBC [www.cbc.ca]

IANAL, but I believe this comes from the quirk in Canadian law that you may make copies of something for yourself quite legally, just not for others. Since the people sharing aren't making the copies, it's legal.

Re:Other newsfeeds (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728294)

Check out the intervener's website
http://www.cippic.ca/ for more information,
like all the court documents ( http://www.cippic.ca/file-sharing-lawsuit-docs ) or the full text of the decision itself ( http://www.cippic.ca/uploads/images/59/Court_Order _Denying_Motion_for_Disclosure.pdf ) or just a summary newsrelease ( http://www.cippic.ca/uploads/images/60/news_releas e_CRIA.pdf )

Not really a good decision.. (1)

CashCarSTAR (548853) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728227)

At least it wasn't for the right reasons.

It was just that they couldn't prove that any crimes had been committed. Which may stick or may not stick, who knows?

The reason why they should lose bigtime, is that the precident that would be set, that a corporation can compel the identify of anonymous actors, would be a very negative one for general freedom.

Think of a corporation could find out who posted a negative (but truthful) review of a book on Amazon, for example, then they could jump on you with both feet, with a SLAPP like suit.

Not good.

Legal in Canada, always, to download. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728230)

It is LEGAL to download music in Canada, because they mark us as pirates at birth and we pay a levy on all storage media purchased, on the assumption it will be used for music piracy. (Is the levy given to artists? who knows?!

So the Canadian law has been changed to make it legal to download music, since we're paying for it.

Uploading (sharing) is illegal here, but now its probably a lot harder to find someone.

Smegma.

next up, vpn tunnels to Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728240)

So now we just wait for someone to sell VPN tunnels from your pc that exits in Canada. :D

Violaters (1)

9812713 (641418) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728243)

I hope this is not another Napster / Metalica problem .. Oh wait it was the same thing. I think that if they want to sue us canadians they should do what was done when napster was sueing people.. Block their access to the networks or even the Subnet. General Netwroking could solve their problems.

Other Downloading Means:

Mirc, edonkey, bit Torrent .. and the list continues..

Have a good one

Canadian court refuses ISP subpoenas (4, Insightful)

belmolis (702863) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728244)

It isn't clear what the real impact of this decision is. If you read the article, it quotes lawyers as saying that the music industry prepared a sloppy case and that it can always try again. It may only be a temporary victory. But at least it sounds like the Canadian courts are requiring a higher standard of evidence of infringement than the US courts are.

Good thing to .... (1)

BeJeRk (767122) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728246)

with all the taxes we pay i woudent be able to pay off a lawsuit and eat in the same month ... my luck they would have thrown the 15% tax on the lawsuit to .... oh well back to downloading and uploading my mp3's with out fear of lawsuit ... for now

In other news.. (1)

sudog (101964) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728248)

Eat it CRIA!

Glad to see Canadians, in this one small space at least, are getting justice for once!

The loophole (2, Insightful)

Rascasse (719300) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728257)

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies onto shared directories on their computers which were accessible by other computer users via an online download service," the judge wrote.

First off, I'm surprised but elated that the Judge seems to have been technically competent enough to see this. However, downloaders be warned: the music industry will now proceed to actually participate in copyright infringement by downloading those shared songs or otherwise monitoring the downloads of those shared songs. The "my songs are shared out but were not actually downloaded" argument might not work next time.

Judge says "no copyright infringement" (5, Interesting)

thirty-seven (568076) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728272)

Even more significant, in my opinion, is that the judge in this case said the reason why he wouldn't give a court order for the ISPs to release names is that he didn't consider this copyright infringement [www.cbc.ca] .

Specifically, he said:

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

To me, this sounds like he's saying that standard P2P file sharing is not copyright infringement. It sounds like as long don't actively upload the file to someone else, or personally authorize them to download it from you, then its OK.

Canada is serving Mp3s for all of the US! :) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8728281)

you can thank us whenever you want! :)

I like it! (4, Interesting)

gagy (675425) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728287)

Earlier today I posted about how glad I am that I don't live in a twisted country like the US, because of a wonderful law that's being discussed. Here's a quick little tidbit.

File sharing would be punishable by prison sentences of up to ten years in addition to large fines. Another bill introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) - Called the "Pirate Act" - would empower the Justice Department to initiate lawsuits against file sharers. According to the both the entertainment industry and Sen. Hatch, P2P networks are virtual dens of thieves, with the most pernicious of un-American activities occurring in an attempt to lure young Internet users into a lifetime of lawbreaking. In defending the Pirate Act, Hatch said the operators of P2P networks are running a conspiracy in which they lure children and young people with free music, movies and pornography. With these "human shields," the P2P companies are trying to blackmail the entertainment industries into accepting their networks as a distribution channel and source of revenue. "Unfortunately, piracy and pornography could then become the cornerstones of a 'business model,'" Hatch said in a statement. The illicit activities of file sharers "then generate huge advertising revenues for the architects of piracy."


And Then I got flamed because in Canada we pay excise tax on CDs (and soon to be other recording media) because they can potentially be used for pirating copyrighted works. I totally agree with that law. The money goes to the recording industry (I think) and everyone is fairly content with the deal. (besides, it's only a few bucks and it seems fair enough to me. Yeah, i know, majority of the people use the CDs for legit purposes, blah blah blah).

While in agreement with the ruling (2, Insightful)

lavalyn (649886) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728313)

it's because it's on a technicality about "insufficient information."

What's wrong with the CRIA obtaining subpoenas against people that they can positively identify as file uploaders of the member companies' copyrighted material? It's not outrageously hard to have somebody at minimum wage sit behind a terminal and try to download music from Canadian ip addresses. And once you have that, it's a known act of copyright infringement anyway, which as we all know, is illegal.

I don't condone the recording industry's stance and think they should be looking to leverage the technology instead of fighting against it, but they do have the legal right to demand information on people that they have reasonable evidence of illegal activity on. Let them sue the people that upload, not people that use the technology that could either upload or not.

Besides, I'm not sure we want the ISPs to take on the role of gatekeeper either. This is a legal liability on ISPs and the costs of that will be borne by the end-user.

How to apply as a skilled worker immigrant (5, Informative)

Gord.ca (236984) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728333)

In case you're tired of living in a freedom-loving dictatorship, here's how to apply as a skilled worker immigrant to Canada:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/skilled/how-1.html [cic.gc.ca]
It seemed relavant :) (Wouldn't I be surprized if someone actually takes it...)

Shaw? (1)

Smallpond (221300) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728360)

Shaw protects their customers from more than the RIAA. They also don't listen to email abuse reports. Maybe all those music downloaders are the same folks selling cheap copies of MS Office.

I blocked 71 of these last week:

Mar 31 12:58:44 mailrouter sendmail[20206]: i2VHwh020206: ruleset=check_relay, arg1=h68-145-125-78.cg.shawcable.net, arg2=68.145.125.78, relay=h68-145-125-78.cg.shawcable.net [68.145.125.78], reject=550 5.7.1
Access denied

summary is not really accurate (5, Insightful)

harlows_monkeys (106428) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728377)

OK, think about this for a minute. Canadian law can't work the way the summary implies, because Canadians aren't idiots. To work reasonably, a legal system needs a way to allow you to discover the identity of someone you want to sue if they have done something that makes them legally liable to you.

Reading the story, we see that this is indeed the case. The ISPs weren't compelled to release the IDs because the music companies had not shown sufficient evidence that a copyright violation had occured. If they had shown sufficient evidence, the ISPs probably would have had to cough up the names.

Open share is not Distribution (3, Informative)

kwandar (733439) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728388)

I've been saying for a while in comments here on /. [slashdot.org] that leaving an open share (what the CRIA would refer to as uploading) would not necessarily constitute copyright infringement.

According to the Globe and Mail [globeandmail.com] , the judge stated ""The mere fact of placing a copy on a shared directory in a computer where that copy can be accessed via a P2P service does not amount to distribution"

This is a huge win for the Canadian public if it stands on appeal as Canadians will be legally able to download, and to have music available in shared directories, allowing both uploading and downloading.

that's it.. (1)

enrico_suave (179651) | more than 10 years ago | (#8728392)

I'm moving.. that's all there is to it...

where do I pick up my moose antlers?

e.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?