Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government The Internet News

Piracy Case Could Change Canadian Web Landscape 156

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the embrace-file-sharing-already dept.
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.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Piracy Case Could Change Canadian Web Landscape

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Not quite... (Score:5, Informative)

    by snowraver1 (1052510) on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:17PM (#27274083)
    I could be misinterpreting this, but this is not about individuals. In Canada, as I understand, it is not illigal to download copyrighted works for personal use. Under Canadian law, commercial infringment is still very much illigal, but infringement for personal use, and no financial gain, is not illigal.

    The issue at hand here is whether or not an individual/corporate entity can link to a copyrighted files (or in this case link to a file that has a link to look for a list of people that might have the file you need).
  • purely legal (Score:2, Informative)

    by salparadyse (723684) on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:29PM (#27274231)
    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.
  • Re:Not quite... (Score:3, Informative)

    by mark-t (151149) <markt.lynx@bc@ca> on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:49PM (#27274487) Journal
    That levy on storage media is intended to subsidize private use copying. Putting something on your computer so that anybody can access it when they have a link to it and then publicly posting that link for anybody to find sort of forgoes any notion that might have otherwise existed that the copy was just for private use, don't you think?
  • by grcumb (781340) on Friday March 20, 2009 @07:05PM (#27275255) Homepage Journal

    This is Canada. We don't make noise. We write letters. And only if it's about something that's really really annoying.

    Yeah, things like the invasion of Poland, or when someone (ahem!) burnt down the city of York. Of course, we deliver those letters personally, and staple the envelope to the forehead of the recipient. Repeatedly.

    ...And politely.

  • by commodore64_love (1445365) on Friday March 20, 2009 @07:07PM (#27275269) Journal

    >>>So this is like the Pirate Bay case, only the issues are being examined in Canada.

    I don't know why you were labeled insightful", because you're flat wrong. Piratebay provides the tracker server which enables piracy. Isohunt does not. Isohunt is like google, a search engine, which means technically they are doing absolutely nothing wrong.

    The fact that google links to all websites, where isohunt only links to torrent sites, is the basis of this case and has implications for ALL search engines, as it may require them to stop linking to torrent sites too.

  • by mariushm (1022195) on Friday March 20, 2009 @07:57PM (#27275635)

    The Pirate Bay (TPB) offers an "optional" tracker that can be used for either legal or illegal purposes.

    You can however post a torrent on TPB without any of the Pirate Bay trackers, so in this case TPB will act just like IsoHunt.

  • Re:Not quite... (Score:5, Informative)

    by damiangerous (218679) <1ndt7174ekq80001@sneakemail.com> on Friday March 20, 2009 @09:28PM (#27276149)

    Essentially the point in the scenarios above if that you've already /paid/ for a "licence" at whatever prevailing rate the things costs.

    Incorrect. Any person can make a copy of any copyrighted musical work for their own personal use. It doesn't mean they can only copy things they already own, it doesn't matter if they've paid anything for it at all. You can come to my house and copy all my CDs, and so can everyone I know. You may also invite anyone to come to your house and make copies of your CDs, including the ones you copied from me. Making any copy of any recording for personal use is not infringement.

    See the "Copying for Private Use" section of the Canadian Copyright Act: http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#rid-33770 [cb-cda.gc.ca]

  • by dadragon (177695) on Saturday March 21, 2009 @05:29PM (#27282349) Homepage

    Yes. The invasion of Poland is largely considered to be the start of the Second World War, beginning 1 Sept 1939. The United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand declared war on 3 September 1939, and Canada on 10 Sept 1939.

    The Americans think of Pearl Harbour being the start of the Second World War, 7 Dec, 1941, but the fighting in Europe had been going on for two years already.

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Working...