Slashdot Mirror
Canada Federal Court Restrains Sale Of 'Pirate' Boxes (torrentfreak.com)
An anonymous reader writes:The Federal Court in Canada has handed down an interlocutory injunction against distributors of Android-based set-top boxes configured for piracy. The devices, which are loaded with software including Kodi (with pirate addons) and Showbox, are now banned from sale pending a full trial.Judge Daniele Tremblay-Lamer wrote in her order: "The devices marketed, sold and programmed by the Defendants enable consumers to obtain unauthorized access to content for which the Plaintiffs own the copyright. [...] They deliberately encourage consumers and potential clients to circumvent authorized ways of accessing content -- say, by a cable subscription or by streaming content from the Plaintiffs' websites -- both in the manner in which they promote their business, and by offering tutorials in how to add and use applications which rely on illegally obtained content."
Honestly, I'd prefer it if they just came set up with Kodi and no add-ons. Configuring Exodus or Spectro is simple enough and most of the add-ons I do not need pre-installed.
idiots shouldnt be allowed to illegally copy the content. After all, somebody still has to pay for it.
The things are putting a negative slant on Android, as if it's a platform for piracy. Hell, I'd say a good chunk of people with "Android boxes" have no idea what it's even doing. I actually appreciate taking these things out of the hands of noobs.
As an avid Kodi user I know the developers of Kodi do not encourage piracy. They forbid the use of their name on any install that deviates from the defaults (sort of like the Firefox license) when offering a device for sale - you must fork. Plugins that make infringement easy aren't even allowed in the official repositories - all of those are in 3rd party repositories.
Kodi is a lot like a torrent or gnutella setup. Nothing wrong with it on it's own, in fact Window Media Center is one of the best closed source comparison products to come to mind, but it's an open source project without child safety locks, just like Linux and BSD are as a whole. The fact third party sellers about the product should not be used against the developers - ever.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Rifle: a weapon to kill and threaten humans?
Oh, its a constitutional right and holy to some americans...
I am in favour of piracy to an extent. After all, you shouldn't be forced to pay for something you hate just because it is well advertised. These people are actively encouraging people to never pay for content, which I am against. This hurts the creators abilities to get paid. If you like it, go pay for it. Support the content you like.
When they start entering public domain again after a reasonable time
this bullshit with copywrites living for multiple generations so any derivative works artists do have to be based on things so old they have absolutely no cultural relevance
You can find someone selling these boxes in almost any low-rend strip mall around here, there's one up the street from me. The content is all ripped, and they sell a "service" consisting of lists of IP numbers for the latest streams. I'm surprised the networks didn't get on this ages ago. I'm not sure stopping the box sales will help, they'll have to stop sales of the content lists too.
While action like this is good legally, I can almost guarantee that it won't change much. I see cunning fellas sell boxes that are benign, so do not flout the order.
What will happen is buyers being pointed to a website, from which a script to autoconfigure the box can be [freely] obtained.
I applaud the judge nevertheless..
The ruling was based on the 'intent of the sellers' NOT the 'tools available/installed' per se. I have an 'Android TV Stick', I can install whatever I want on that, if I choose to install things that could be used for pirating that's on me but I also don't have to use them for that (Kodi I can use for my internal media).
Once again, demonstrating that Canada's Supreme's seem much more knowledgeable about 'tools that enable a crime' and the 'crime itself' (e.g. guns can be used to commit crime, anyone trying to sell one for use in a crime would be slapped down hard & fast, selling a gun in and of itself however isn't a crime & shouldn't be).
Are you sure you meant to say that? Cause the flipside to that is a lot of people want to ban firearms - so your remark translates as ban all computing devices?
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
but yes, the purpose of these things seem to be to bring piracy to the masses who could never figure it out on their own.
Had someone at work brag about their box and all their content.
I think the key thing here isn't so much the box itself, it is the legitimacy of it. There are probably a big chunk of people who get these boxes and think it is completely legit. Now one can argue about the nuances of copyright infringement all day, however at best these things are dubiously legal. At least when someone does it that knows what they are doing, they more less understand what it is they are really doing and are getting. For Ma and Pa android box owner, they may not have the same background to really understand what is going on other than "Hey pretty pictures!"
So not only, as you say, someone has to pay for content, but there is also the issues on the box owner getting into legal trouble without being really aware (heading off a lot of lawsuits before they start), and from the content owner if something like this becomes legitimate use, it undermines their ability to do anything about it if they ignore it.
circumvent authorized ways of accessing content
Sounds like freedom.
'"The devices marketed, sold and programmed by the Defendants enable consumers to obtain unauthorized access to content for which the Plaintiffs own the copyright."
That description could apply to ... lots ... of things.
To discourage and punish widescale commercial (for profit) copyright infringement. It's an abuse of the legal system to take those same laws made to combat commercial enterprises profiting to the tune of tens of thousands or even millions of dollars, and apply them to individuals violating copyright to watch a few movies for free. The penalty in the latter case badly needs to be revised to something like 3x the cost of the movie(s).
And why does this have a DMCA tag? The DMCA is a U.S. law, and this story is about a Canadian court decision.
US prosecutors(*AA sock puppets) regard any perceived harm to a US company as breaking US law, regardless of where it occurred. They also regard all of the Internet as an extension of US territory.
Question, was it your intent to claim that a hammer serves no legitimate purpose? Because that is what you just did. I know if I tried to claim that rifles serve a legitimate purpose, you'd yell and whine that they do not, so I'm just going to bypass that and say that, for the sake of argument, lets say they do not. By adding a rifle to the list of "murderhammer" and "robmask", you are claiming that hammers and skimasks serve no legitimate purpose.
tl;dr: Irony, when you inadvertently claim that a hammer serves no legitimate purpose, in your attempt to make all things be about your hatred of firearms.
The DMCA is an American Law, it has no jurisdiction in Canada.
I was rather shocked to see a YouTuber I had respected (Darbin Orvar) do a video shilling for one of these boxes and posting an Amazon referral link in her comment section. Considering she used to work at Facebook I figured she would be intelligent enough to realize the "free movies" including such recent films as "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" were nothing more than illegal streaming sites with an RSS feed or similar feeding the poorly designed Android app on the box. Suckers born every minute, I guess.
-==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
It looks the devices are about $50 on US Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Android-Streaming-Miracast-Receiver-AML8726-M8/dp/B00N75U45Q/184-4649182-9896364
Or there is a Pro version with Android 5.1 for $30 more:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00LP6OX56?psc=1
hmmm ....
Libraries have to pay much more for the same DVDs than regular consumers. The content trolls also operate pay-per-play schemes in many countries.
I expect that these companies will just stop installing streaming addons but make the instructions for installing the addons readily available. In fact, they already are readily available.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I am surprised these even went anywhere.
Mesh networking and IRL sneaker-net sharing seemed to have died off pretty hard with the internet bandwidth explosion over the past 7~ years.
Of course, it looks like it might be making a huge comeback given this popped up.
Mobile Phones and apps also make it a lot easier too. So who knows.
If the media cartels keep pushing, they'll go completely offline entirely, using illegal broadcasts, even darker-nets and piracy parties again.
Just give us fucking decent media, no stupid restrictions, no service-exclusives, no constant attacks on fair-use and 90% of everyone will be happy.
These are literally the only things causing so much piracy.
People WILL pay for things if the price is decent and there aren't stupidly abusive restrictions on them, Netflix, Steam and every other online distribution service has shown this for years now.
Rifles can tenderize the hell out of a side of beef. Just sayin.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
At what U.S. pawn shop can I buy a lawfully made DVD of Song of the South, Pinocchio and the Emperor of the Night, or Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea? If "nowhere", that's only because the law empowers copyright owners to act like the proverbial dog in the manger.
For one thing, Canada has the digital locks bill, which is the same thing. For another, how may refugees from the DMCA is Canada willing to absorb?
Judge Daniele Tremblay-Lamer's name makes a good pun in french: Judge Daniele "shake the sea"
The DMCA is a U.S. law, and this story is about a Canadian court decision.
Yeah so? Being out of US jurisdiction didn't help Kim Dotcom.
m. f
No, cannada has the MAFIAA tax on all media sold, so the canadian people have therefore already paid for it, so they can just freely used it as it has already been paid for
Sleep in the bed you made
It looks unlikely that he was having a pop at hammers, or even rifles. It is more likely that he was joking about an object with a fairly obvious purpose being marketed with a narrower purpose for the sake of having an angle.
Then you got a touch precious, thinking someone was taking your little rifle away or something.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.