Slashdot Mirror
Piracy Case Could Change Canadian Web Landscape
meatheadmike writes to tell us that a recent Canadian court case brought against the Canadian Recording Industry Association by isoHunt Web Technologies, Inc, could drastically change the web landscape in Canada. "The question before the British Columbia Supreme Court is if a site such as isoHunt allows people to find a pirated copy of movies such as Watchmen or The Dark Knight, is it breaching Canadian copyright law? 'It's a huge can of worms," said David Fewer, acting director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa. 'I am surprised that this litigation has gone under the radar as much as it has. I do think this is the most important copyright litigation going on right now.'"
If you can download their movie for free, Terrance and Phillip are going to go bankrupt.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
So this is like the Pirate Bay case, only the issues are being examined in Canada. Hope there's enough people making noise about this up north to have an impact.
512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
I don't understand. Is the torrent site suing the CRIAA (Canadian Recording Industry Assh*les from America) to see whether non-Canadian content is copyrighted by the CRIAA? I thought those companies were subsidiaries of the recording companies and they just cross-license their stuff.
Legalese is so very confusing.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Everyone yells and jumps about over copyright. And while in truth yes, it will have an effect on our lives and how we conduct business, the law will never settle the matter. No matter how many judgements, treaties, proclaimations, arrests, convictions, and everything else we throw at it, it cannot change the fact that the internet is global. You can't stop the signal, nobody can. We can't simply dismantle the network, and try as we might to control what goes over it, if a connection can be made someone will figure out a way to get the data through. The internet doesn't care about copyright. It exists to transmit information between people, and nothing will ever deny that power. Not as long as it exists.
We might bear witness to a fifty year war on copyright, pirates, and blah blah blah, but the problem will never go away. The signal will always be there, someone will always have a copy, and eventually the economic drain that will come from fighting this war will bankrupt its supporters. Eventually. It might not happen in five years, or twenty, but it will happen.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
...and your OS runs your browser, and your bios loads your OS, and your hardware is the platform on which your bios runs, and your hardware uses electricity, which is generated by the power company by burning coal, which is mined from the earth. So really, this all the fault of the planet.
Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
It's different because Canadians have ALREADY paid for the content, in the form of a levy on all storage media. So the media companies want to be paid twice.
if a site such as isoHunt allows people to find a pirated copy of movies such as Watchmen or The Dark Knight, is it breaching Canadian copyright law?
I don't get it.
Are they trying to subtly make a point that only certain movies should be protected?
Or do they really feel that the general public doesn't know what a "movie" is, and could use some examples?
Maybe it's a nitpick, but something about that language just seems gratuitous, yet most news media seems to do just that.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
The intent of the site is that people searching it can find the location of copyrighted materials.
Since the consequences of putting up such "sign posts" is that people will find this material it is therefore arguable that the consequences were foreseen (if disregarded).
This is called inferred intent. The principle comes from UK Criminal Law but is applicable universally because it speak of a basic truth. That to recklessly ignore the natural consequences of your actions, but to carry on with those actions anyway, is tantamount to intending those consequences.
Ergo - the site's purpose is to facilitate the downloading of copyrighted materials.
Ergo - they are guilty.
As to whether they are guilty of a moral crime is another matter.
That question has already been asked here in the USA. Is linking illegal in the US? YES in the US.
There, fixed that for you.
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
repeat after me indexing is not copying.
No matter how much the RIAA wants you to think otherwise. Indexing or making other available of where to find something is very different from actually making it available.
Also making it available is not the same as copying it. People who put a movie up on a server are not violating copyright. Digital media must be copied to temporary storage to be played.
Do not listen to the RIAA and their weird interpretation of what is a violation of copyright.
+1 cause you're technically right, but seriously, if America thinks its illegal, they'll pressure someone else to think the same thing.
Only reason why tv-links went down was because of US involvement.
go to Google and type in:
"bandName" "recordTitle" download inurl:blogspot
just substitute "bandName" with the name of the band you want and "recordTitle" with the title you need from them.
BANG.
the blogs linking to them come up.
sigh. So simple and convenient...
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
+1 cause you're technically right, but seriously, if America thinks its illegal, they'll pressure someone else to think the same thing.
Only reason why tv-links went down was because of US involvement.
Completely true. The US attempts to push its ideals on other countries (I don't even need to give any examples, as anyone should be able to think of quite a few).
There are many items where Canada has held it's own on standpoints (copyright so far, leniency on marijuana etc). My biggest complaint is that the general viewpoint of "Americans" (as we refer to US citizens even though they aren't the only country in america) is that their viewpoint is the only right on and everyone else should follow suit.
My original post was to clarify that:
illegal in the US != illegal in other countries
Hardly redundant, and an important point to make as it seems many aren't clear on that.
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill