Slashdot Mirror
Canadian ISP Fights Back Against Copyright Trolls
An anonymous reader writes "Distributel, an independent Canadian ISP, has fought
back in a file sharing lawsuit by opposing a motion
to disclose the names of subscribers alleged to have engaged in file
sharing. The company did not oppose a similar request in November
2012, but says in court documents filed on Friday that several
factors led to a change in position after it received another
request for more names. Those concerns include evidence of
copyright trolling, privacy issues, and weak evidence of actual
infringement by its subscribers. The decision to fight back points
to mounting ISP frustration in Canada with file sharing lawsuits
that come after the Canadian government sent clear signals that such
actions were unwelcome."
From part 11 of the "Statement of faccts" in that motion :
Now I've seen many of the summaries for a lot of these motions (not one against them 'till now, since most ISPs offer resistance with a wimper) and not once have I seen an ISP actually explain what an IP is with layman-friendly clarity and how fickle a method of identifying a user it is. If this is how everyone treats IP addresses, there really wouldn't be any standing for disclosure of personally identifying information on any user unless law enforcement is already conducting surveillance on that IP.
But that's not what happened here.
They (copyright/troll folks) basically used a piece of software that flagged (apparently) content matching some signature of theirs to a bunch of addresses with no corroborating evidence like which P2P network was being used, if that, pseudonyms (although, I was under the impression most networks don't require them now), protocols or anything remotely grounding their assertion that their copyright was violated.
This is basically a fishing exepedition and this time, the ISP called on it. I don't know what they're normally like or if they offered resistance like this in the past. TFA says they didn't fight a notice back in November 2012. But these guys asking for subscriber info has no standing at all. Kudos to them for standing up to this!
If computers were people, I'd be a misanthrope.
Suing people is big business. It costs more to defend yoruself then to settle and porn companies in particular delight in threatening people with public lawsuits to scare them into settling regardless of evidence.
The US court system is full of feet dragging as well. The profit is made by threatening to sue in order to get a settlement. They won't make money in court, but they can scare would-be defendants into settling for a few grand each in order to not be named as a defendent and to not bear the costs of a court case.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
I understand the principle. And I gather that it's effective in the US. Doesn't mean the rest of the world functions in the same way.
I can tell you from having lived and worked in several countries and in several languages that the American mindset is not to be found outside the US. In the same way as most developed nations take universal health care as a given, so there's a general assumption that society's institutions exist to serve society's ends. They don't particularly operate in the service of free enterprise, and most people would be astonished if you were to suggest that they should. That, it seems, is a particularly American position. I'm not judging it as good or bad - it's brought about good outcomes as well as bad ones - and of course I'm not saying that every American takes this position, but it is certainly particular to the US.
Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.