Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Thursday November 01 2018, @01:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the fightin-the-man dept.

What Happens When Telecom Companies Search Your Home for Piracy

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

Canadian citizen has house raided, all electronic devices copied, compelled to divulge accounts and passwords, is interrogated for 16 hours, and it is a *civil* complaint... he's already on the hook for a $50,000 payment to the plaintiffs, and he has not even been to trial yet.

When 30-year-old web developer Adam Lackman heard loud knocking on his Montreal apartment door around 8 AM, he thought he was about to be robbed.

When the police showed up after about 20 minutes, according to Lackman, he opened the door and was met by lawyers, a bailiff, and, rather ominously, a locksmith. Seeing that he wasn't about to be mugged, the police left.

One of the lawyers represented some of Canada's most powerful telecommunications and media companies: Bell, Rogers, Vidéotron, and TVA. The other was there to be an independent observer on behalf of the court. Lackman was told that he was being sued for copyright infringement for operating TVAddons, a website that hosted user-created apps for streaming video over the internet. The crew was there with a civil court order allowing them to search the place.

The search was only supposed to go from 8 AM to 8 PM but it ended at midnight. The team copied laptops, hard drives, and any other devices they found, and demanded logins and passwords. Lackman, who called a lawyer in to represent him, was questioned for nine hours by the opposing counsel. They presented him with a list of names of people suspected of being digital pirates in Canada and asked him to snitch. He didn't recognize the names, he told me, and said nothing.

[...] Now, Lackman is embroiled in expensive legal proceedings for a case that pits him against several telecom corporations and media companies, ultimately to answer: Was TVAddons a platform for innovative streaming apps, or was it designed to enable piracy?

[...] Lackman ran TVAddons, a website that hosted unofficial apps (referred to as "addons") for Kodi, a popular open-source media center that allows users to stream media from their devices and over the internet.

[...] The lawyers obtained an injunction that prevented Lackman from operating TVAddons and ordered him to hand over login credentials so that a court-authorized technician could shut down the site and social media accounts.

[...More]

They also got an "Anton Piller" order, which allowed the lawyers—as well as a supervising agent of the court, bailiffs, and technical experts—to enter his home and search the place for devices, hard drives, and documents, and to preserve any evidence they found.

It's as close as you're going to get in civil law to criminal interrogation and seizure

[...] According to Israel, this is the harsh reality of being a small player sued by telecoms and media companies in Canada, where the dominance of the "big three"—Rogers, Bell, and Telus, the latter of which isn't involved in Lackman's litigation—is often referred to as a telecom oligopoly.

The case highlights an imbalance of power, Israel said, "where individuals who experience harms don't have the resources to advance them."

Deep-pocketed companies, on the other hand, "not only have the resources to pursue [perceived harms] to the point where individuals don't have the ability to defend themselves, but also to advance mechanisms with fewer safeguards," Israel said.

[...] Even though the parties are now negotiating a payment plan, uncertainties abound—nobody knows what will happen to Lackman now, least of all him. As his lawyer Renno put it, the case is remarkably still in "very, very early stages."

And that is the point: in the new Canadian anti-piracy regime led by powerful companies, just being accused of enabling piracy can come with immense personal consequences even before your day in court.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by termigator on Thursday November 01 2018, @09:43PM (1 child)

    by termigator (4271) on Thursday November 01 2018, @09:43PM (#756628)

    And before you put something out for public consumption, these days, you certainly do have an obligation to consider its uses and/or how it is being used.

    Yeah, just like gun manufacturers[/sarcasm]
    It is a slippery slope to hold someone legally accountable for a tool/utility based on how other folks use the tool for illegal activities.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday November 02 2018, @04:18AM

    by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Friday November 02 2018, @04:18AM (#756752) Journal

    It certainly can be a slippery slope. And I won't say that's "right" either. But here's the deal: Guns *have other uses* besides illegal activities. And that seems to be the current acid test for secondary infringements - if it can be reasonably proven that a technology has other uses besides piracy (maybe more realistically is currently being used for such) it becomes a gun and is legal. Then you go after those using it illegally. If it has no use but infringement... there is no real equivalent directly in US weapons law but it might be regarded as something akin to a nuclear weapon - there is no way a government will allow such to be in private hands and you shouldn't expect an ATF tax stamp will cover it.

    --
    This sig for rent.