Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Friday February 21 2014, @10:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the A-leashed-hyena-is-still-a-hyena dept.

dbot writes

"In the latest turn in an ongoing legal dispute, Canadian ISP TekSavvy has been ordered to hand over the IP addresses information of subscribers allegedly engaging in copyright infringement of Voltage Pictures works.

While it doesn't look like a great decision on the surface (an IP address does not uniquely identify an infringer), the court specifically said it wants to sign off on the wording of any contact notices issued by Voltage to prevent extortionary "Copyright Troll" messages. It will be interesting to see if this new decision scales."

This discussion has been archived.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: 5, Interesting) by Terence on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:35AM

    by Terence (1375) on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:35AM (#4628)

    About 2 years ago Canada got a updated copyright law. It was worded and and sold to the public as a balance between protecting copyrights and protecting private users. One way they did this by limiting damages awards to $100 to $5000 per claim against personal use.

    So the court is making Voltage get their notification letters approved (so there's no trolling for excessive early settlements) and has suggested if they do bring individuals to court they shouldn't expect anywhere near the maximum $5000 per claim.

    I think if Voltage starts doing the math, they'll realize this is a money losing proposition, and just go away. Which is exactly how I understood the law was supposed to work.

    So, nicely done.

    I value your opinion as much as the next person. Unfortunately the other person doesn't give a shit what you think.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Interesting=2, Informative=2, Total=4
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Appalbarry on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:41AM

    by Appalbarry (66) on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:41AM (#4631) Journal

    Don't know why the summary at top didn't say it, but what was really noteworthy was that the court specifically identified copyright trolls as a problem, and set out restrictions on their activities.

    In Canada, at least, your average copyright troll can no longer make enough profit to be successful

    "This [Voltage's position] would be an acceptable position but for the spectre raised of the 'copyright troll' as it applies to these cases and the mischief that is created by compelling the TekSavvy's of the world to reveal private information about their customers. There is also the very real spectre of flooding the Court with an enormous number of cases involving the subscribers many of whom have perfectly good defences to the alleged infringement. Finally, the damages against individual subscribers even on a generous consideration of the Copyright Act damage provisions may be miniscule compared to the cost, time and effort in pursuing a claim against the subscriber."

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by T0T4L_L43R on Saturday February 22 2014, @03:58AM

      by T0T4L_L43R (2169) on Saturday February 22 2014, @03:58AM (#4674)

      Don't know why the summary at top didn't say it

      Well it isn't in the summary, but it is in the link to Michael Geist's (pretty frikken excellent) article.

      We have our share of problems up here in The Great White North, but lawsuites for fun and profit are not amoung them - hell, even our sad litle neo-con government despises them.

      From TFA:

      >the case will be managed by a Case Management Judge
      >TekSavvy will only disclose subscriber name and address information
      >Voltage will pay all reasonable legal costs incurred by TekSavvy before the release of any information
      >the demand letter to subscribers will include a copy of the court order and clearly state in bold type that "no court has yet made a determination that such subscriber has infringed or is liable in any way for payment of damage".
      >the contents of the demand letter will be approved by the parties (including CIPPIC) and the Case Management Judge.
      >any further cases brought against subscribers will also be case managed
      >the information released by TekSavvy will remain confidential, will not be disclosed to other parties, and will not be used for other purposes. The information will not be disclosed to the general public or the media.

      Agree. They're doing it right.

  • (Score: 1) by Absinth on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:44AM

    by Absinth (2711) on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:44AM (#4632)

    Ruling allows for personal customer information to be released upon court's request. Voltage goes and pays for that data first and then what about seeding? Can it be seen as unlawful distribution of copyrighted material? In Canada you can't get charged for substance abuse but it's a whole other game if you distribute it.

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by harmar on Saturday February 22 2014, @01:48AM

    by harmar (2020) on Saturday February 22 2014, @01:48AM (#4651)
    Yup, and to get awarded more than the base amount they actually have to prove damages done to them.. i.e have to justify how joe blow individually hurt them financially by the amount they are requesting, so chances are they will only get the minimum of $100. Not only that they can't do a blanket lawsuit, they have to have each case individually before a judge. They will be losing money hand over fist. This is just a scare tactic.

    Some other interesting tidbits in another article ( scribers-linked-to-alleged-downloading-of-films-1. 1697618#ixzz2tz9lnaAG [])

    • Voltage was also ordered to pay any costs that TekSavvy incurs in identifying the customers in the case, as well as legal fees.
    • "If Voltage is asking for figures in excess of ($100) I think the court is going to shut them down pretty darn quickly".