Federal Court Approves First 'Pirate' Site Blockade In Canada (torrentfreak.com) 24
A group of major broadcasters and telco giants, including Rogers and Bell, have obtained the first Canadian pirate site blocking order. TorrentFreak reports: Last year, a coalition of copyright holders and major players in the telco industry asked the Canadian Government to institute a national pirate site blocking scheme. The Fairplay coalition argued that such measures would be required to effectively curb online piracy. Canada's telco regulator CRTC reviewed the request but eventually denied the application, noting that it lacks jurisdiction. The driving forces behind the request, Bell, Rogers, and Groupe TVA, were not prepared to let the blocking idea slip away, however. A few months ago the companies filed a lawsuit against the operators of a 'pirate' IPTV service GoldTV.ca. The companies argued that the service provides access to their TV content without licenses or authorization. Among other things, the rightsholders requested an interim injunction to stop the operators, who remain unidentified, from continuing to offer the allegedly-infringing IPTV service. This was granted, but despite the order, some of the infrastructures remained available.
This resulted in a follow-up request from the media giants, which became the setup for the first-ever pirate site blocking order in Canada. Specifically, the companies requested an interlocutory injunction order that would require several Canadian ISPs to block GoldTV domain names and IP-addresses. Late last week this request was granted by a Federal Court in Ontario. An order, issued by Judge Patrick Gleeson, requires most of Canada's largest ISPs, including Cogeco, Rogers, Bell, Eastlink and, TekSavvy, to start blocking their customers' access to GoldTV within 15 days. The order is unique in North America and relies heavily on UK jurisprudence, can be extended with new IP-addresses and domain names, if those provide access to the same IPTV service. The court doesn't prescribe a specific blocking method but mentions DNS and IP-address blocking as options.
This resulted in a follow-up request from the media giants, which became the setup for the first-ever pirate site blocking order in Canada. Specifically, the companies requested an interlocutory injunction order that would require several Canadian ISPs to block GoldTV domain names and IP-addresses. Late last week this request was granted by a Federal Court in Ontario. An order, issued by Judge Patrick Gleeson, requires most of Canada's largest ISPs, including Cogeco, Rogers, Bell, Eastlink and, TekSavvy, to start blocking their customers' access to GoldTV within 15 days. The order is unique in North America and relies heavily on UK jurisprudence, can be extended with new IP-addresses and domain names, if those provide access to the same IPTV service. The court doesn't prescribe a specific blocking method but mentions DNS and IP-address blocking as options.
Re: Again the ISPs have too much power (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Is a VPN product in Canada a ISP with users accounts to be blocked in Canada?
Is every VPN in Canada now a "Canadian ISP"?
Every VPN now has to avoid having any physical network Canada?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Canadian companies, licensed by the Canadian government, licensed content providers. Nowhere in the article do I see anything about other country involvement.
Further, the CRTC ruled it (as a legal entity) did not have jurisdiction. Not the same as ruling the entire Canadian government had no jurisdiction. Moving to the court system is just another weapon in the ongoing battle between licensed content providers and other entities providing the same content.
Of concern here is the fact the
Re: (Score:1)
I'll take your VPN and raise you "deep-packet inspection".
The ISP is THE single point of failure. We need another path
Re: (Score:1)
"Deep-packet inspection" would not be able to tell more than a VPN is in use and the amount of data and exact time...
Block all use of any detected VPN service due to
Can all ISP break any consumer level VPN encryption efforts?
Re: (Score:1)
"Deep-packet inspection" would not be able to tell more than a VPN is in use
That's all they need if they want to cut your connection.
Can all ISP break any consumer level VPN encryption efforts?
They can easily detect and block "unauthorized" [determined by the authorities] use of a VPN, and TOR service. Somewhere in the world they already are. It's a simple matter of time before it becomes ubiquitous. Legal issues are moot when industry writes the rules.
Re: (Score:1)
Just that a lot of data moved to and from the VPN as a service...
Blocking VPN use on every consumer ISP account as a new gov rule?
Try a business account? Get the tax rate of been a business?
The gov can step in again and block VPN use on both consumer and business networks?
Re: (Score:1)
The government and ISP have complete control over your connection, they can pass or block anything they want, but they're not going to show their hand until it's necessary.
Re: (Score:1)
A VPN is treated a consumer ISP and has to log use and block sites
Re: (Score:1)
Thats going to be a funny tech law.
We've done worse
VPNs will be easy to control. The ISPs will be ordered to block the ones that don't comply with logging and tracking requirements. It's not a big stretch from present conditions, depending on your location.
So now I'll go to GoldplusTV... (Score:2)
and get my content from there. If that fails, I may go to hahaGoldTV and wecandothisGOLDTV just along with thisischeapGOLDTV.
Seems kind of silly but then so is pretty much our entire set of copyright laws.
Re: So now I'll go to GoldplusTV... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Boy, I wish we could do this (Score:1)
the 1st will put an stop to that! (Score:2)
the 1st will put an stop to that!
Re: (Score:1)
Minority rule is NOT a rePUBLIC!
Terroristic threats is not fascism
Stopping terrorists is NOT fascism.
Fixed your tag line for you
Re: (Score:2)
Well then, end the Electoral College RIGHT NOW.
Uh, Canada doesn't have one.
Michael Geist's analysis of the ruling (Score:3)
Michael Geist posted an in-depth analysis of the ruling on his blog [michaelgeist.ca].
Lowest Court in the Land (Score:2)
So this is a decision by the "lowest court in the land". I am relatively sure that someone will appeal it to a higher court such as the Ontario Court (Provincial Division).
Bell is evil (Score:2)
Bell is behind the push for all sorts of draconian legislation, including an attempt to block VPNs
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/201... [michaelgeist.ca]
If you do business with Bell, you are actively working against a free and open internet.
Canada only (Score:2)
It has no jurisdiction on sites that are not in the ".ca" domain.
In other words, no effect.