Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Music Swappers Win Court Battle
Columbo writes "The CBC has an article today detailing a win for file sharers in Canadian courts. The ruling upheld the right of ISPs to withhold the names and addresses of people alleged to be trading copious amounts of music via P2P networks. The unanimous decision doesn't completely close the door for further action against the ISPs by the Canadian Recording Industry Association."
That's what they told the recording industry.
Alright RIAA, Lets Roll! Time to take over those pesky northerners who harbor p2p fugitives and play fast and loose with copyrights. Bring it on! You are either with us or against us -- Hee-haa!
The court also said "The appeal will be dismissed without prejudice to the plaintiffs' right to commence a further application for disclosure of the identity of the `users' taking into account these reasons,''
:(
The CRIA was told, if they wanted too, to come back "with stronger, and more current, evidence".
It might be interesting to see how they come back and how the Canadian courts view their new case.
Lets hope privacy wins the day!
Now, back to watching my government possibly lose a confidence vote
Also, wasn't the court battle with the ISPs and not the alleged music swappers?
Confusing headline...
...where weeds are legal, gays can marry and music is free!
Also in the article:
Summary: a non-event.The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Here's the text of the ruling.
This ruling may only be a temporary setback for the CRIA -- it talks about copyright holders "being robbed of the fruit of their efforts", and seems to give guidelines for better evidence collection practices for future litigation...
The Canadian government is planning on changing copyright law to take away many of our rights (luckily, the current minority government probably won't manage to do this).
This petition "is a way of letting Parliament know that you want to be considered and that you don't want your rights to be abraded every time the music industry's profits slip a little." Please sign it if you're Canadian and agree with it.
I'm so proud of Canada! What next? Maybe they will come out from under the Queen's skirt.. er... shadow?
Sniper's Motto: One shot, One kill- If you run, you'll only die tired.
or maybe CAN's official's palms are not as well greased like there are here [US].
RIAA (and MPAA) need to get some criminal proof so they can use subpenoa's, otherwise, just pointing and saying 'gimmie' is not going to make the courts jump on their side.
P2P does not appear to be dying, as long as you lump bittorrent under that umbrella.
I'm suprised more people are not using services like http://fastmail.fm/ and http://www.shinyfeet.com/file sharing (well fastmail does not have sharing, but you can put small files into a public folder - shinyfeet is unlimited space/storage but no public, must be shinyfeetshinyfeet)
but I guess those services are too much like the old napster.
do you have shinyfeet?
Why canada? Why not start an ISP in a country with enough infrastructure to give you a good backbone, but so little law that the RIAA and it's equivelants cannot sue you? You provide a proxy for a nominal fee and downloaders and uploaders can proxy through you without fear of reprisal. You are the end of the line and not obligated to release any information about the next step.
I do security
It's not a win for "file sharers". It's a win for everyone, as the court demonstrated and understanding of overall privacy issues in the internet age, and didn't allow one little thing to stomp all over that.
File sharers will still be prosecutable, those doing the prosecuting will simply have to do a bit more work in order to find out who they are, and this is GOOD.
OK, Silly question time: What is there that prevents someone here in the US from "buying" or "renting" (or being given) access to a proxy server in a country where the same laws do not apply, and using the proxy to download music/movies/various?
In Thursday's decision, the three judge-panel turned down the appeal request but wrote that the earlier ruling should not have made conclusions about whether downloading or uploading music should be illegal.
On first reading this article you may quickly come to the conclusion that this court case decided that sharing music wasn't breaking any laws at all. It's obvious that the judicial system sees that there is something wrong with sharing music, but at least until they come to the official conclusion and write that down, it's nice to see they'll uphold the rights of the ISPs' customers.
I can't wait until the music and hollywood industries wake up and start to sell their products in the way that people want to buy them. I'm more than willing to pay for my music but I'm not going to pay for a whole album when all I want is one song. It's kind of like going back to the 50's when the music industry was single driven instead of album driven. Right now we're between the old and new models of business - I can't wait until the transition is over.
Shh.
If you felt relieved or happy about this ruling, you were probably concerned about the legality of your actions already.
And also, to respond to a comment I saw about privacy...I really don't think this has anything to do with privacy. Privacy doesn't include the right to hide your crimes. Expecially when you leave your ID (ip address) at the crime scene. I mean, imagine if someone stole your stuff, but the police told you that they would get it back, but they aren't allowed to find out where they live.
By the way, there is no right to steal music or break copyrights. You are NOT entitled to have a copy of that song you like so much. If you obtain a copy of a song without providing compensation to the copyright holder, your are breaking law and stealing from the copyright holder. (if you aren't stealing the song, you are stealing the "right" to make copies)
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
The court explicitly overturned the previous decision that file sharing is not copyright infringement. That question, which some people thought had been settled, is now up in the air again. Read this analysis - and chalk up one more point against the Slashdot editors, because I filed a more accurate version of this story and they ran the misleading one.
There are so many things wrong with that sentence that I wouldn't know where to start. And no, I don't use Marjaunna either. What do people do with it anyway, spread it on bread?
Make me proud to be Canadian
In Soviet Russia, p2p rules the Court!
O wait, it's already like that, isin't it?
Looks like it's your lucky day.... :)
"Even for Slashdot, that was a very obscure reference!" - Anonymous Coward
the bad news is that it has to be Rush.
ISPs should still delete their logs, delete them early, and delete them often. Or are there now laws that require you to keeps logs long enough for the RIAA (or it's Canadian equivalent) to subpoena them?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
You should also mention that we're socialist. Many Americans are genetically programmed with a strong aversion towards socialism (which they equate with communism) and big government. If you're considering immigration, please consult with your doctor first.
Oh and the other difference: in Canada we just say "please consult your doctor", in USA you must sign a 4-page contract that describes how "it's the first party's responsibility to consult their doctor and the second party shall not be held liable severely or jointly xor stately nor federally inhereto the first party thereof doesn't consult said henceforth doctor."
Cant have it both ways . Either the levy is going to pay for the copying or copying is illeagel so they cant be charged the levy on blank media. I have a feeling the recording groups wont want the levy on blank media stoped.
I trust Microsoft as far as I could comfortably spit a dead rat
It's unlikely that they would stop the levy on blanks in the event that file sharing was declared illegal, because the levy existed long before the Internet was popularly available, and is not designed to pay for file sharing. It's designed to pay for private copying - for instance, if you make a copy of a CD onto a tape to listen to in the car.
The terms of the levy already explicitly state that the copy has to be made by the person who uses it (making copies for your friends has been illegal since long before the Net came along, and the levy didn't change that), and that it does not apply to "communication to the public by telecommunications", which sure sounds to me like what a file-sharing uploader does.
only a matter of time before we see...
btefnet.ca
supernova.ca
shuntv.ca
It wasn't Canadians, it was the British. And it wasn't the Whitehouse until after it burned down, and some low-bid contractor "fixed" the building by painting it white.
It seems rather clear to me, or am I just being silly. Yes, their business model is all screwed up, but theft is still theft.
It seems to me that there are sufficient alternatives to illegal downloading that there's no reason to do it. Ok there are plenty of people willing to argue that it's not illegal, but they're just being daft.
Ah well, obviously I'm just another troll....
My IP address is used by members of my family, my neighbors (via an open wireless access point), and hundreds of strangers (via the TOR anonymization service.)
What good is it to subpoena the name of the person who pays the bill for that IP address? There's no way to find out the identity of the person that actually committed the crime.
You misunderstand the intent of this ruling; did you read the article?
The three-judge appellate court specifically reprimanded a lower court for commenting on the legality of file-sharing in Canada; the issue at hand is whether the recording companies have enough evidence to force ISP's to reveal their users real names, and NOT the legality of file-sharing. All the appellate court said was, "provide us with more evidence than you have now, and we'll reconsider your request." Read the part about the lawsuit being dismissed without prejudice.
This decisions is based entirely on privacy; why should an arbitrary corporation have access to my personal information based on unsubstantiated accusations? The court ruled correctly in requiring a threshold of evidence before forcing ISP's to reveal customer information. Of course you're correct in saying copyright violations are criminal, but that is not the issue here at all. An individual's right to privacy in business dealings (i.e., purchasing broadband) must be weighed against the amount of evidence presented by an accuser; the judges just said the recording industry didn't have enough.
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/6357.cfm
The ruling allows companies to withhold information, but does not force them to do so. Some, like Vidéotron, already gave the info to the CRIA, and seemed happy to do it.
It seems the names were not revealed because, even though there were 1000s of shared files, there was no evidence anyone downloaded any of the files. So how does the music industry prove that piracy is being committed without getting a sort of "internet wiretap"? Private citizens certainly don't have this authority, so does law enforcement need to become involved. I fear that people abusing the internet and then cheering these rulings will result in laws that cause much more monitoring of internet traffic. For in the end, these people are criminals who are breaking the law.
Vote for Pedro
I say Cheers!
*clink*
If the Canadians have learned anything from the RIAA, they'll bribe their legislature to change the law so they can win next time.
Here in .NL there is a org that is just like the MPAA, called BREIN. (translated to english it's Brain) (pinky not included) .CA. .NL wil be as wise as the ones in .CA.
At this moment they are sueing ISP's for the same reason as in
I hope the judges here in
What would you do without a monitor? Sit and look stupid behind a keyboard and a mouse
Freedom has YOU!
I have freaks! I did something right...
- Honesty is a tough thing.
-
{Typos mine: source: ISBN 0-8144-7197-8}-
Playing by the rules means living with an occasional setback.Don't establish your ethics by whatever everyone else is doing; everyone else is often not doing what's honest or right.
Stay the course on doing what's honest and right even though the world has declining values.
Teach your children well, not as Mrs Vera Benchley did.
-
Doing the right thing often means more work.Doing what's right and honest almost always brings a temporary setback.
Rewards for doing what's honest and right takes time to emerge.
Hang in there with what's honest and right even when you have to weather storms for doing so.
Sometimes those in charge don't see the ethical issue, and even if they do, change doesn't come easily.
-
Being ethical sometimes means running behind in the race.Don't define ethical issues by using the "either/or" conundrum. There are other options.
Define issues by what's right and what's honest.
Make decisions putting your values first.
Find a way to do what needs to be done without sacrificing honesty or doing something wrong.
Remember that doing what's honest and right will bring more work--but doing what's honest and right also brings the fruits of the extra labor.
-
Expect a little mockery for playing ethically.Let the sprinters pass you by; there's more to the race and more to winning.
Don't be enticed by short-term gains.
Sprinters falter; don't be discouraged as they pass you by.
-
Being ethical means you have to speak up.Expect mockery for doing what's right and honest
Endure the mockery;this too shall pass.
Garner strength during the mockery from knowing the eventual outcome for the mockers;you will win the race.
-
Sometimes the ethical route is opportunity knocking.When you see the issue (elephant), talk to your coworkers.
Don't let the elephant go so long that it causes damage.
The consequences of saying nothing are always greater than the consequences of speaking up.
-
The ethical finish first eventually, and with peace of mind.See doing what's right and honest as an opportunity, not a burden.
Think through the consequences of right and wrong and explore the opportunities that doing what's right offers.
-
Ethical indiscretions haunt the sprinters.Keep your eyes on your values and doing what's honest and right.
Don't be discouraged with the temporary setbacks and costs.
Finishing without baggage is the goal.
-
Success comes from doing what's honest and right.Always tell the truth; that way you don't have to worry or remember.
When facing a moment of truth, disclose and move on.
Remember the freedom of not being haunted by a falsehood.
View ethics not as a deterrent but an opportunity for success.
Remember the race has a nonlinear path and you may lose some opportunities if you fail to see what's right and honest as a means for succeeding.
Oh, come back, proud Canadians
To before you had TV,
No hockey night in Canada,
There was no CBC (Oh, my God!).
In 1812, Madison was mad,
He was the president, you know
Well, he thought he'd tell the British where they ought to go
He thought he'd invade Canada,
He thought that he was tough
Instead we went to Washington....
And burned down all his stuff!
And the White House burned, burned, burned,
And we're the one's that did it!
It burned, burned, burned,
While the president ran and cried.
It burned, burned, burned,
And things were very historical.
And the Americans ran and cried like a bunch of little babies
Waa waa waah!
In the War of 1812!
Now some hillbillies from Kentucky,
Dressed in green and red,
Left home to fight in Canada,
But they returned home dead
It's the only war the Yankees lost, except for Vietnam
And also the Alamo... and the Bay of... ham.
The loser was America,
The winner was ourselves,
So join right in and gloat about the War of 1812
And the White House burned, burned, burned,
And we're the one's that did it!
It burned, burned, burned,
While the president ran and cried.
It burned, burned, burned,
And things were very historical.
And the Americans ran and cried like a bunch of little babies
Waa waa waah!
In the War of 1812!
In 1812, we were just sittin' around,
Mindin' our own business, puttin' crops into the ground.
We heard the soldiers coming and we didn't like that sound.
So we took a boat to Washington and burned it to the ground.
Oh... we... fired our guns, but the Yankees kept-a coming,
There wasn't quite as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and the Yankees started running,
Down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, oh, oh....
They ran through the snow and they ran through the forest,
They ran through the bushes where the beavers wouldn't go.
They ran so fast, they forgot to take their culture,
Back to America, and Gulf and Texaco
So, if you go to Washington, its buildings clean and nice,
Bring a pack of matches, and we'll burn the White House twice!
And the White House burned, burned, burned,
But the Americans won't admit it
It burned, burned, burned,
It burned and burned and burned
It burned, burned, burned,
Now, I bet that made them mad
And the Americans ran and cried like a bunch of little babies
Waa waa waah!
In the War of 1812!
In the Excited States, you has freedom. Freedom to be tagged like a bass with a national ID card, freedom to pee in a bottle because your boss tells you to, freedom to have bars on your windows because you need them, freedom to pay high medical insurance fees to corporations. I could go on, but you get the point.
Yay, they win, lucky them, they get to do it and we don't :( Let's all move to Canada!!!!
Who's gonna win?
The most mobile adversary. Someone start a Star Wars (heh, heh, heh) program!
who don't want people to listen to music that THEY FUCKING PURCHASED or otherwise....
Watch this for six hours straight... don't worry, its free
http://www2.b3ta.com/mind-control/
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here...
But the way I see it, all parties are corrupt.
Conservatives would give money and the country's assets away to their rich friends who were of "old money" and quite often foreign. (I'm thinking Mulroney and corporatization of Canada, Ontario tories and selling the toll highway to Spain)
Liberals are on the hook now for giving money away to rich friends who are of the nouveau riche and usually Canadian. (Chuck Gite might be french, but he's still Canadian)
The NDP would ideally give the money to the have-nots and labour unions.
The Bloc are like the NDP but they only care about Quebecers.
Given all that, I suppose I'd prefer a combination of whigs and NDP'ers. The money would stay in the country and not necesarily be all put in the hands of folks who'd race across the border for cheap smokes, booze and casinos.
Nah...
Biodiesel or even restaruant oil!
and that $75 will get you about 10 miles in 2 hours? :)
Not Free SF Reader
...to say that the lower judge shouldn't have said anything about file sharing being legal or not. Canadian law very clearly institutes a surcharge on recordable media so that the act of downloading is NOT A CRIME.
If it becomes a crime, it'll be because Canadian legislators forgot what they did last time, perhaps stimulated by some nameless freebies we'll never know about.
For now, this is over, but if the amnesiac Commons goes back on its own word, the ball game will start all over again. arggghhhh...ank
Still hoping for Gentle Treatment...
Correct if I'm wrong since I don't live in Canada. Don't you pay an extra tax on things like cd-r's, harddrives, etc. that goes to the music industry already because they could be used for copyright infringement. I say just get what you already paid for then.
Are you going to use the same mathmatical logic that you dislike the content providers using to determine how much should be yours?
the appeals court basically threw out the original judge's ruling that said that placing music in your shared folder on kazaa did not infringe copyright in canada.
it did uphold the ruling that the CRIA had insufficent evidence to show that the 29 people whose identities they wanted revealed, were actually the people who did the file sharing.
however, the court encouraged them to come back with stronger evidence, in which case they would grant the order to divulge the identities and allow them to be sued.
not sure how this is a "win" for file sharers.
Canadian citizens win court battle. It's not just filesharers that win when courts decide in favor of Average Joe.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
For every piece of recordable media sold in Canada, that includes hard drives, blank tapes, blank cd's EVRYTHING RECORDABLE, the music industry receives a comission.
Yep even if you just want to burn your photo's to disk, back-up your college work etc the music industry gets it cut.
http://www.ccfda.ca/subsections/fre_library.html
If they want Canadians to pay for downloaded music its time they gave that money back or stopped collecting it.
Until then Canadians have paid the copyright dues in the form of this blank media levy, even those who dont download music!
What this country really needs is an NDP government with a slight minority
Having lived in Manitoba most of my life, believe me: the last thing we want running this country is the NDP. They've practially ruined the province, ensuring it will stay as a rural backwater for decades to come. Winnipeg used to be one of Canada's biggest and fastest-growing cities, and now it hasn't changed in 30 years. Meanwhile, pretty much every other city in Canada over 100,000 people is growing. Businesses simply will not move to Manitoba, the taxes are insane.
That being said, I have to agree with "regressive conservatives". I'm about as right-wing as you get when it comes to economics, but for some reason the morons following Harper want to take Bush's lead and turn this country into the 1940s.
Thankfully, we still have at least one conservative leader who isn't a complete asshat - although Klein's stance on gay marriage still irritates me.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
The way this works (to my understanding) is that a person can copy a CD for personal use but you can't get someone to copy the CD for you. Now the question is who is making the copy when a song is downloaded from the Internet. Am I making the copy for personal use when I request the song (since the original file stays at the point of origin) or is the file sharer creating the copy? This is the modern version of the philosophic question about the forest and the tree.
It's obvious the downloader is creating the copy. They're the one searching for what they want, they're the one clicking on the link to download it, and they're the one moving it to their MP3 server when it's done. (Yes, I have an MP3 server. Sue me. Oh....wait.....)
Saying the uploader is making the copy is stupid. It's like saying when Chuck borrows Rob's CD and burns a copy on his own computer at his own house, that it was Rob who made the copy. All the uploader is doing is listing what songs he has. Just like displaying your CD collection in a CD tower at home, so any visitor can see exactly what you've got.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......