MPA and Amazon Ask GitHub To Suspend Kodi Add-On Developer's Account (torrentfreak.com) 48
The MPA, MPA-Canada, and Amazon have filed a request with Github requesting that a Kodi add-on developer's account be deleted from the platform. Citing a copyright case and a permanent injunction handed down by Canada's Federal Court, the content companies claim that the account is still being used to infringe their rights. Github has left the account intact, however. TorrentFreak reports: In February 2018, a developer known online as 'Blamo' (aka 'Mr. Blamo') revealed that he, in common with several of his counterparts, had been threatened by content companies. From there the trail went cold but according to a complaint filed against Github this week, legal action in Canada followed. On September 7, 2018, a dozen companies including the studios of the MPA/MPA-Canada plus Amazon and Netflix launched a copyright infringement lawsuit at Canada's Federal Court against an individual "doing business" as Mr. Blamo.
"In the context of that action, our clients alleged that [Blamo] notably developed, hosted, promoted and distributed infringing add-ons for the Kodi media center, which provided unauthorized access to motion pictures and television content for which the copyright is owned by our clients," the MPA writes. According to Federal Court records, Blamo did not mount any kind of defense so as a result, the matter was decided in his absence. On January 15, 2019, the Federal Court handed down a final judgment, including a declaration of infringement and a permanent injunction. "The permanent injunction enjoins and restrains [Blamo] from, inter alia, hosting, distributing or promoting infringing Kodi add-ons and their repositories, including notably the 'Blamo' repository and the "Chocolate Salty Balls' infringing add-ons," the MPA adds.
The problem here is that, according to the MPA and associated companies, Blamo has a Github account where it is claimed he continues to "host and distribute infringing Kodi add-ons and their repository, including notably the Chocolate Salty Balls infringing add-on and the Blamo repository." This, the MPA says, amounts to contempt of court. What's particularly interesting here, however, is that the MPA isn't asking for the specified URLs to be deleted. Instead, it asks for Blamo's entire Github account to be deactivated instead.
"In the context of that action, our clients alleged that [Blamo] notably developed, hosted, promoted and distributed infringing add-ons for the Kodi media center, which provided unauthorized access to motion pictures and television content for which the copyright is owned by our clients," the MPA writes. According to Federal Court records, Blamo did not mount any kind of defense so as a result, the matter was decided in his absence. On January 15, 2019, the Federal Court handed down a final judgment, including a declaration of infringement and a permanent injunction. "The permanent injunction enjoins and restrains [Blamo] from, inter alia, hosting, distributing or promoting infringing Kodi add-ons and their repositories, including notably the 'Blamo' repository and the "Chocolate Salty Balls' infringing add-ons," the MPA adds.
The problem here is that, according to the MPA and associated companies, Blamo has a Github account where it is claimed he continues to "host and distribute infringing Kodi add-ons and their repository, including notably the Chocolate Salty Balls infringing add-on and the Blamo repository." This, the MPA says, amounts to contempt of court. What's particularly interesting here, however, is that the MPA isn't asking for the specified URLs to be deleted. Instead, it asks for Blamo's entire Github account to be deactivated instead.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
WTF? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why does Canada's Federal Court have ANY say over GitHub hosted in the US???
Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because they are crying bitches... just like everyone everywhere else when it comes to "imaginary property" rights.
The moment we decided it was okay for people to own ideas is the moment we started this long descent into hell.
There are some merits to some "imaginary property" laws sure, but it has clearly gone too far!
Re:WTF? (Score:4, Informative)
Let me introduce you to how the fashion industry works. [youtube.com]
(Hint: They have no copyright.)
How did the world survive before copyright was invented in 1710 by publishers !? /s
Re: (Score:2)
How did the world survive before copyright was invented in 1710 by publishers !? /s
Well, television, film, and recorded music didn't exist. The vast majority of people were illiterate. So "the world survived before copyright" because there was nothing worth copying.
Re: WTF? (Score:3)
Wrong! Music was plagiarised all the time, America The Beautiful/ God Save the Queen right off the top of my head, but if you do a little research, it was common to âoeborrowâ musical scores and set new words to them
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong! Music was plagiarised all the time, America The Beautiful/ God Save the Queen right off the top of my head, but if you do a little research, it was common to âoeborrowâ musical scores and set new words to them
But that generally wouldn't be copyright infringement, since copyright (at least the United States version) only applies to works "fixed in any tangible medium of expression". If you hear a piece of music and start singing different words to the same melody, there can't be any copyright infringement because you didn't make a copy of anything physical.
Re: (Score:2)
If you sing that piece of music in public you are subject to being sued for infringement whether you make a physical copy or not. It doesn't mean that you will get sued but you would still be infringing on the composers copyright. I guess if the piece of music you heard (and are now putting different lyrics to) was being played for the first time and had never been written down you may not be infringing the composers copyright. Any other cases you would need a public performance license to use the compositi
Re: (Score:2)
Because Canada enforces US court orders, and the US enforces Canadian ones. If something is a crime in multiple countries, they often agree to help one another.
IMHO, Mr Blamo should have hired a lawyer, to see if Canadian law protected him from such (perhaps doubtful) suits.
Maybe he did hire a lawyer. (Score:5, Interesting)
IMHO, Mr Blamo should have hired a lawyer, to see if Canadian law protected him from such (perhaps doubtful) suits.
Maybe he did, and the lawyer advised him not to respond.
I don't know how it works in Canada. But (I've heard that) in the US it's a good idea NOT to respond to court actions that don't have jurisdiction over you - because telling them that and/or asking for the suit to be quashed or you to be removed as a defendant because of that is construed by the courts as VOLUNTARILY GIVING them jurisdiction. You asked the court to rule, so if it rules against you, that, along with any other rulings it makes, sticks.
But IANAL. Can an actual copyright lawyer please comment? Or maybe one each from the US and from Canada?
Re: (Score:3)
It sounds like a follow-on to https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org] and may have been a Canadian developer in question. Certainly it was brought in Canada....
Citing the Bell Canada vs Lackman, https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/f... [canlii.org]
"I am of the view that its true purpose was to destroy the livelihood of the defendant, deny him the financial resources to finance a defense to the claim made against him," the judge wrote. "The defendant has demonstrated that he has an arguable case that he is not violating the [Cop
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how it works in Canada. But (I've heard that) in the US it's a good idea NOT to respond to court actions that don't have jurisdiction over you - because telling them that and/or asking for the suit to be quashed or you to be removed as a defendant because of that is construed by the courts as VOLUNTARILY GIVING them jurisdiction. You asked the court to rule, so if it rules against you, that, along with any other rulings it makes, sticks.
Do you have a citation for that? I can't think of why a defendant wouldn't be able to respond with a motion to dismiss the case because of lack of jurisdiction.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need a copyright lawyer to tell you that that is wrong [americanbar.org]. The ABA will do it for you for free
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need a copyright lawyer to tell you that that is wrong. The ABA will do it for you for free.
Thank you.
But that is all explicitly international. Does a similar rule also apply to suits across state lines in the US?
Re: (Score:2)
Which rule? The one that you can contest personal jurisdiction in a court without becoming subject to the personal jurisdiction of the court? Or the one that says that a State does not have personal jurisdiction over you simply because the plaintiff dealt with you and is a resident of the State? Or the topic of the article -- where plaintiffs in the Canadian suit are seeking deletion of a US ser
Re: (Score:2)
IMHO, Mr Blamo should have hired a lawyer, to see if Canadian law protected him from such (perhaps doubtful) suits.
Bullshit, on two counts:
1) Canadian law is irrelevant if it's a US company, and this wasn't a crime in multiple countries. He didn't represent himself and the case was automatically decided against him as a result, but in the US it's innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
2) If he had hired a lawyer or even represented himself of acknowledged this in a manner which allowed them to get more than "mr blamo" as his name that would have opened him up to non-legal attacks such as the MPA is
Re: (Score:2)
1) Canadian law is irrelevant if it's a US company, and this wasn't a crime in multiple countries. He didn't represent himself and the case was automatically decided against him as a result, but in the US it's innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
There's about a 99% probability that he was in Canada, because he was sued in Canada and the courts accepted they had jurisdiction over him. It's Github who is in the 'States.
Re: (Score:3)
IMHO, Mr Blamo should have hired a lawyer, to see if Canadian law protected him from such (perhaps doubtful) suits.
Bullshit, on two counts:
1) Canadian law is irrelevant if it's a US company, and this wasn't a crime in multiple countries. He didn't represent himself and the case was automatically decided against him as a result, but in the US it's innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
That is only true for a criminal case. This is a civil case.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Especially when there are treaties concerning intellectual property and extradition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Well Trump breaks them at will so it's a bit hard to know which ones are still in force from day to day...
Re: (Score:2)
Because if the USA and Canada can't settle this, Disney is going to stop the car and come back there.
Re:WTF? (Score:4, Insightful)
For the same reason the US gets to arrest, charge and imprison someone who creates a gambling site outside the US but allows US citizens to use it.
Don't even try and suggest that extraterritorial jurisdictional reach isn't something the US doesn't throw around itself all the time, and don't act surprised when another country also does it.
Re: (Score:2)
Why does Canada's Federal Court have ANY say over GitHub hosted in the US???
I would guess it's because the GitHub site is accessible in Canada.
Re: (Score:3)
Because the United States wants to enforce US copyright world wide, which means reciprocal deals to enforce other country's copyrights and legal rulings.
Personally I'd be happy if we just ended those treaties, went to 15 year copyrights and just ignored the howls of anguish from Disney et al.
Re: (Score:2)
It does not. Canada's Federal Court is the LOWEST court in Canada and it can (and should) be totally ignored.
everyone should now... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
too late
ORLY? (Score:2)
It was just there a moment ago.
Re: everyone should now... (Score:2)
So funny. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So funny. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Check out Lawful Masses on YouTube. It's surprising how often court filings contain stuff like that. Particularly ones that involve something someone said on Twitter.
Coming soon to a .cn domain near you (Score:2)
I mean, .ca, .cn, what's in a letter...
Github did not leave the account "intact" (Score:2)
Github has left the account intact, however.
But Github did in fact delete/hide the two repos in question, so the account is not "intact" is it?!
The article never says... (Score:2)
This article never says, is this the Amazon and Netflix addon which lets you watch these services with a paid account? or is this an addon that lets you watch without paying? If it is the first, then fuck them. It's always been fucking ridiculous that companies get to use their DRM to determine the platform that you use. DRM is being used to enforce that you have to use a platform that spies on you. I'll always either use the platform and player of my choice that DOESN'T spy or I'll pirate.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
" Linking to the content and not distributing it is an almost impossible case to win against"
Because we all know how successful litigation was in shutting down ThePirateBay 12 years ago. Surely they are unable to index swarms any more, right?
The same deal goes for authors of plugins for Kodi. Basically they scrape hosters of the unauthorized content, and rob them of their ad supported websites. Fuck a pirate robbing a pirate, how cool is that?
You can kill the bearer of the news, but it's useless when the ne
Re:metadata vs actual content (Score:5, Informative)
the plugin, as far as i can gather, aggregated links to the content as it existed online already from sites.
Thats exactly what these kodi plugins do. The plugins scrape websites for the content, and it does so from the users machine.
To be pedantic, there is a tower of inter-related plugins from far more than one author involved. Some plugins scrape IMDB for movie names, ratings, and actors. Some plugins scrape particular "illicit" websites for movies being available for download. Some plugins even scrape up fan-created artwork for the movies.
The plugin being targeted merely coordinates these other plugins to provide a UI, a simplified user experience, and there are easily dozens of these plugins that coordinate it all, some have been "stopped" already, and some that have been "stopped" have even been reborn.
These plugins are written in python, and there is a constant stream of updates to them because the websites being scraped dont like it either and attempt to foil the scrapers. Therefore the users of these plugins are all too familiar with (re)locating and downloading them.
The person in question, code named Blamo, operates one of many repositories of these plugins. His service to the community is maintaining compatible versions of all these various plugins together in one place.
A proper troll (Score:2)