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This discussion has been archived.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:
  • 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.
  • Laws and stuff (Score:3, Insightful)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Friday March 20, 2009 @04:55PM (#27273841)

    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.

  • Re:Laws and stuff (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Rip Dick (1207150) on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:02PM (#27273923)
    Sounds reminiscent of the war on drugs...
  • Re:Laws and stuff (Score:4, Insightful)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:18PM (#27274093)

    Sounds reminiscent of the war on drugs...

    The laws are screwy. I can take a 2x4 to your head and be out in six months for aggravated assault, but spend ten years in jail for downloading a song you made. I think we're already there.

  • Why this wording? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:19PM (#27274101) Journal

    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.

  • by TuaAmin13 (1359435) on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:30PM (#27274241)
    I think they mean obviously commercially copyrighted works.

    How would I know if your youtube video that is posted on a torrent site is freely distributed by you or someone else? This is the worst case "it obviously is not free"
  • by snowraver1 (1052510) on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:30PM (#27274245)
    No, they are suing becouse this is a grey area in the legal system and isohunt is tired of getting harassed my various right holders. They initiated the lawsuit so that a judge would finally decide if they run an illigal business or not.
  • Re:Not quite... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jurily (900488) <jurily.gmail@com> on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:30PM (#27274255)

    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.

    They want to be paid as many times as they can. Remember DRM?

  • Re:Not quite... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by shark72 (702619) on Friday March 20, 2009 @05:38PM (#27274339)

    The article in question is about downloading movies. You're referring to the Canadian levy on blank CDs, which goes to Canadian recording artists and Canadian record labels. If you've bought a blank CD in Canada, odds are that none of it went to the people who worked on The Dark Knight or Watchmen -- both products of the USA.

    Your purchase of blank media might give you a sense of moral justice in pirating, say, Celine Dion or Bryan Adams tracks... if this is ample justification for you, then go about your merry pirating ways and God bless you. But it would be a stretch to apply this moral justice to downloading Watchmen.

  • Re:Not surprising. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dubbreak (623656) on Friday March 20, 2009 @06:01PM (#27274591)

    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.

  • by RichMan (8097) on Friday March 20, 2009 @06:09PM (#27274677)

    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.

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

    by MadnessASAP (1052274) <madnessasap@gmail.com> on Friday March 20, 2009 @06:11PM (#27274693)

    I'm a Canadian and I download music and movies, I do buy blank media but I don't buy it for moral justice, I buy it because I need somewhere to put the movies and music. I don't NEED to settle my morals because frankly I don't give a shit. I'm around when some of my friends watch those paparazzi shows and if Hollywood can afford those clowns ridiculous lifestyle then it can sure as hell afford my free copy of Watchmen.

  • Re:Not surprising. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Vu1turEMaN (1270774) on Friday March 20, 2009 @06:13PM (#27274709)

    +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.

  • Re:purely legal (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mariushm (1022195) on Friday March 20, 2009 @06:57PM (#27275171)

    And how would you do that?

    Let's say you have "Madonna.jpg"

    How is IsoHunt supposed to know if it's
    (a) a scan of a Madonna CD artwork (illegal)
    (b) a picture you made with a camera of a Madonna statue
    (c) a picture of your girlfriend you like to nickname "Madonna"
    (d) a picture of the cover of a book that has Madonna in the name.

    Or, if I make a movie of myself and friend at a party, dancing on Prince's music, and I label it "Prince - Purple rain.avi" should IsoHunt remove it because it may be the actual video of the song or should IsoHunt staff be forced to download it and count how many seconds of Purple Rain actually are (if any) so that they can determine if it's fair use (less than 30 seconds of song) or not?

    If it's more than 30 seconds, do they use the Canadian laws where IsoHunt is, or MY laws, which may consider any length of song fair use?

  • Re:Not quite... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by c1t1z3nk41n3 (1112059) on Friday March 20, 2009 @07:44PM (#27275549)
    This while true is besides the point. Hollywood still makes more than enough money and it isn't anyone elses fault that they distribute it to a small minority of the people who make their products.
  • Re:Not quite... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by yayotters (833158) on Friday March 20, 2009 @07:55PM (#27275621)
    Why would 'private use' need a tax? What a load...
  • Re:Not quite... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ubergeek65536 (862868) on Friday March 20, 2009 @09:00PM (#27275999)
    Of course bands will still be able to record without the record labels, what they won't be able to do is spend $100K on recording an album. Nirvana recorded Bleach for $600 You're also forgetting that the vast majority of acts make their income from performances not from record deals. http://www.negativland.com/albini.html [negativland.com]
  • Re:Not surprising. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dubbreak (623656) on Friday March 20, 2009 @10:07PM (#27276369)

    +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.

  • Or... googleHunt (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 21, 2009 @02:58PM (#27280845)

    1. go to www.google.com
    2. type: torrent "Lily Allen" "It's not me It's you"
    3. hit enter
    4. google = isohunt

Is a person who blows up banks an econoclast?

Working...