Canadian Recording Industry Goes After P2P Users 481
Txiasaeia writes "Taking its cue from its American counterpart, the CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association) has begun the hunt for music file swappers. Unlike the RIAA, the CRIA are trying to find 29 (!) swappers only who use either Shaw, Telus, Rogers Cable, Bell Sympatico or Quebec's Videotron. Some companies like Shaw are openly opposing the request, whereas others, like Videotron, are pretty much planning on rolling over once the paperwork is done. Videotron customers beware: they say that they're 'actually delighted that the CRIA is doing what it's doing.' Arguments in the case begin on Monday in Toronto."
But the practice is illegal in the U.S.?! (Score:5, Interesting)
For example, it has been legal in Canada since 1998 to make a single copy of a recording for personal use, such as copying a CD onto your hard drive or MP3 player. But the practice is illegal in the U.S.
Uh. Did I miss something? Did MP3 ripping from CD get banned in the USA while we weren't looking?
P2P prosecution worldwide (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Levies already! (Score:5, Interesting)
I am confused. Am I getting fined in advance, so that I can download or does the industry want it all ways?
CANADA (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm glad this crap isn't taking place in the Netherlands. For now downloading is legal here, uploading isn't.
Some dutch artists are trying to influence the government into changing the law here to go after the downloaders as well.
If cds were cheap here, I would say "all power to them" but right now they cost about $30,- each.
What is the approx. price of cd's in the US? a somewhat empty mind wants to know.
Re:But the practice is illegal in the U.S.?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Just ask the Slashbots.
Videotron (Score:4, Interesting)
I've never had more trouble with any internet/TV company in my life. Horrible customer service, no explanations for outages, outrageous rates. I had to hire a lawyer to get out of a $900 cable TV bill. Not only did I never sign up for cable TV, I don't even own a TV!
But with the way the market works here in Canada (I don't know about the states or elsewhere) there is only one cable provider in each of the major urban centers. So, so much for healthy competition. I'm not at all surprised that Videotron will simply hand over IPs/names to the CRIA, it saves them paperwork and hassles, and fits in with their total disregard for customer service and respect that they've made themselves known for in Montreal.
ISPs are in a sticky position (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Good. (Score:2, Interesting)
Personally, as a SHAW customer, I say "bring it on". Since I can honestly say I've never shared one bit of mp3, but have downloaded many, I almost hope that I get one. Of course, legal fees would break me, but I'm pretty sure I can find a lawyer looking to make a name for himself to work pro bono
Re:Levies already! (Score:3, Interesting)
Guess what! The "Music Industry" isn't a single entity, there's plenty of different players each with their own viewpoint, everyone from the Artists to the Labels to the Publishers to the Retailers have their own views and opinions.
here we go again... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Good. (Score:3, Interesting)
This is certainly reasonable, but it does not make for a sustainable business model. What would you have the recording industry do once it has alienated so many customers that it starts bleeding money profusely? Shall we subsidize the entertainment industry like we subsidize the airline industry? Or shall we let the old companies with failing business models die out and be replaced by newer, smarter companies willing to sell a product that consumers like, packaged how they want, and at a price they can afford?
Re:aw crap (Score:5, Interesting)
Canada has a pretty decent history of not prosecuting laws that are still being debated (While weed legalization was being discussed police stopped small scale arrests,[Still busted some big grows]) I don't think there are any (Canadian, American's are stupid) politicians who don't have doubts about enforcing the ridiculous American IP laws.
My only conclusion is that this issue has been sacrificed as part of a deal. I'm enough of a realist to know that deals of this nature need to be struck. I don't think that whoever allowed this to happen realizes the consequences.
First we are bowing to the American's in such a way as to forever compromise Canada's reputation as an honest unbiased power (Lester B. Pearson, etc.), second we are an example to other countries. If we fold IP law will remain restrictive and useless until society once again returns to a sane level of socialism or another technological breakthrough on the order of magnitude of the internet takes place causing people to reconsider intellectual property. (Trying to think of something that fits this description leads me to a short list.) Either way you are condemning people in the third world to ignorance and poverty for another hundred years, the death toll is on your head. Depending on how seriously you think knowledge = power = life, Paul Martin might be worse than Hitler.
Simple form: Paul, if you are willing to negotiate our intellectual freedom we may decide to negotiate for it back, is one life too much to pay?
not news. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:But the practice is illegal in the U.S.?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Guys, they are only going after people who DISTRIBUTE files.
And so they should.
Leaving the "occasional" offenders alone, and those who are obeying our laws and downloading only.
Call me a leech, and I'll say it's the law up here.
The people coulnd't have asked for a better law.
Yo Grark
Intimidation campaign (Score:5, Interesting)
But under the Copyright Act, it remains illegal to give or sell a CD copy to a friend, since it's not for personal use. In the same vein, distributing copies to friends online is prohibited.
and a related article:
Canada deems P2P downloading legal [com.com]
I'm in Canada and I've sampled a number of songs from the binary newsgroups: alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.* as the law allows me to (for now)
That's not a P2P service, obviously, but from the ISPs own newservers. So wouldnt the ISP make a better target? After all, arent they distributing content to 900,000+ subscribers (according to the article)?? Think of the damages one could claim against an ISP if they were found guilty of copyright infringement on that scale.
Why pick out 29 individuals to pursue legal recourse? Because it's about fear and publicity. These 29 people are not likely to have the inclination, resources, or will to fight an expensive legal battle. Like the RIAA cases, they will settle for a couple thousand $ and a press conference where they tearfully apologize for thier wrongdoings. Fellow canadians who do not follow the legal aspect of such issues closely will simply hear 'file sharers get sued' and freak out and think the downloading music is wrong: mission accomplished. Will the press make the point that personal copying in Canada is LEGAL when reporting these stories? Possibly, but I'm not betting on it.
Re:You have to laugh (Score:3, Interesting)
Coongratulations! you are supporting the legal effort against you.
And if you're buying Pepsi....
20 years? Are you kidding? Capitalism has survived at least twice that and this pattern repeats itself, over and over again.
Lenin was almost right. The consumer pays for the rope that business is going to hang them with.
Re:Levies already! (Score:1, Interesting)
Rogers Cable (Score:3, Interesting)
I suspect they might crackdown on bittorrent movie downloads pretty soon... considering they have no monthly download cap.
Hopefully they upgraded their cable infrastructure to support the additional load for the set-top movie boxes, otherwise I'll be one unhappy high-speed cable customer.
And for those who dont know, Rogers also offers TV cable, Cellphone services, and operates a video rental store chain.
Re:Levies already! (Score:3, Interesting)
And do you believe it's right for those who never use P2P to be forced into subsidizing your downloading? Or should Billy be able to send those pictures to grandma without paying money to the music industry?
How about this - when you purchase a CD at full price, you're paying a substantial amount of money (relative to actual costs) for that CD. Now, the recording industry is not going to provide you with substitute media should something happen to your CD. Thus, it is up to you to make a backup copy of your CD to provide for such an occurrence. Now, should you have to pay (again) money to the recording industry, simply to ensure you have access to music for which you've already paid? If your answer is yes, then it should also be yes to the question of whether you should have to pay a small amount of money each time you want to listen to a song. After all, the entertainment industry is entitled to your (and everyone else's) money, right?
Re:But the practice is illegal in the U.S.?! (Score:5, Interesting)
It's also the reason we have the retarded levy on blank media (CDs, tapes, etc.). It's a misconception that the extra fee is supposed to cover losses due to piracy, it's actually supposed to cover losses due to legal copying.
It wouldn't be such a bad thing except for the stupidity of taxing media that are used for things other than music. Why system administrators should have to pay a levy to the music industry in order to archive data to CD is a bit hazy.
It's also a tad mysterious as to why this law applies exclusively to music, and no other copyrighted works.
Used to work for Videotron (Score:4, Interesting)
All changed when he decided to merge with Rogers Cable. Quebecor saw this as an opportunity and used nationalistic rantings and political influence to get the "Caisse et Placement du Quebec" to invest with Quebecor and avoid having a Quebec company join up with one from out west. I couldn't believe people actually believed all that BS but it worked. Instead of winding up with a coast-to-coast network with tons of users, a media giant wound up getting the biggest cable and high-speed internet provider in Quebec.
I was a tech support monkey when that happenend, and I couldn't believe it. We quickly saw where it was gonna go. Pierre K. Peladeau (that's french for Darl McBride, he's the a-hole son of one of the richest man ever in quebec, who passed away in the nineties) started complaining that the management of Videotron was one of the worst one he ever saw. He proceeded to turn almost all of the cable installation/service call work to sub-contractor, to get rid of the highly payed and qualified techs. He also wanted to lower the salary of the tech support people (making barely 15 bucks an hour on average), and transferring some of the load to his 8 bucks an hour slave call centers. The techs went on strike for a year (I was gone at that point), but Quebecor had the infrastructure to make it work without them (with the help of scabs).
Of interest is that our IP telephony project was in highly advanced stages before the buy-out, with techs using it at home for beta testing. That was quickly thrown out the window after Quebecor stepped in, along with many interesting R&D projects. That could have been big in a few years, but thank to the short sightedness of greedy PK Peladeau, Videotron will miss the boat. PKP managed to suck the soul out of the company to make it the most profitable for his short-sighted, greedy, spoiled kid mind.
I don't know if you can tell, but I don't like him too much either.
Re:But the practice is illegal in the U.S.?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Copy restriction?
Ooooooooh! You mean "broken"! I get it now.
No, you see, you've misunderstood... Phillips owns the IP rights to the concept of a "Compact Disc". By a company claiming that they have produced such an object, they provide a certain basic level of guarantee that they have complied with Phillips' specifications. How can we can "circumvent" an access control mechanism on a CD, when no such mechanism exists in the spec?
Why, if these "broken" CDs deliberately violated the spec, well, that would count as outright fraud to still call it a CD. So they must simply have broken. Does the DMCA also say that "in the event a product breaks, you may not repair it"?
Re:Only a matter of time .... (Score:2, Interesting)
That's crap, we allread pay $ rec tax on media hr (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:But the practice is illegal in the U.S.?! (Score:4, Interesting)
DSLAM problems, and online music retailer "sharing (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:But the practice is illegal in the U.S.?! (Score:4, Interesting)
I can come over to your house, give you a CD, tell you how to put my CD in your drive, rip it, and burn your own copy. That's legal, in part due to the levies on recordable media in Canada (which go to the artists, though none of that money has ever been distributed; that's another story).
I can't, however, make a copy for you. Weird, but true, from my understanding.
So - the question in Canada is: under which of these two scenarios does P2P filesharing fall? Apparently, the downloading is not illegal, but the sharing is illegal [com.com].
Re:Not quite. (Score:2, Interesting)
IT's more like "We KNOW that "audio cd-r" are specifically for copying audio, so we can tax that at the going rate.. but standard cd-r is not all for audio.. so we won't be able to get away with charging as high a levy on it.. so we'll just charge a tiny one for everyone, and it will work out".
I don't believe it is actually any seperate levy for pirating or legit copying.... it's just considered a different form of media with a different market.
Which it is.
In the music industry's twisted world.