Downloading mp3s is ruled legal in Canada.

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,941
5
0
Court rules against record firms
Door slammed on Canadian music industry's bid to obtain names of file sharers


CANADIAN PRESS

In what analysts are calling a "stunning" decision, the Federal Court has ruled against a motion that would have allowed the music industry to start suing individuals who make music available online.
Justice Konrad von Finckenstein ruled today that the Canadian Recording Industry Association did not prove there was copyright infringement by 29 so-called music uploaders.

He said that downloading a song or making files available in shared directories, like those on Kazaa, does not constitute copyright infringement under the current Canadian law.

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings," von Finckenstein wrote in his 28-page ruling. "They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

He compared the action to a photocopy machine in a library. "I cannot see a real difference between a library that places a photocopy machine in a room full of copyrighted material and a computer user that places a personal copy on a shared directory linked to a P2P service," he said.

The ruling sent shock waves through the industry and surprised copyright analysts.

"It raises questions of the viability of suing individual users in Canada under current Canadian copyright law," said Michael Geist, a professor at the University of Ottawa specializing in Internet and e-commerce law and technology counsel with the law firm Osler, Hoskin and Harcourt.

Geist, who called the decision "stunning," anticipates it will push the industry to increase its lobbying efforts for copyright reform in Canada.

Last month, the industry association took five Internet service providers to Federal Court, trying to force the companies to hand over the names and addresses of 29 people who allegedly shared hundreds of songs with others using programs like Kazaa last November and December.

The judge denied the recording industry's request, which means the five high-speed Internet providers - Bell Canada, Shaw Communications, Telus Communications, Rogers Cable and Videotron - won't have to divulge their client lists.

Without the names, CRIA can't begin filing lawsuits against 29 John and Jane Does who it alleges are high-volume music traders.

They're currently identifiable only through a numeric Internet protocol address and user handles like Jordana(at)KaZaA.

All the ISPs except Videotron have fought the order. Videotron had agreed to comply because owner Quebecor is also concerned about piracy in other parts of its business, which includes newspapers, television, Internet services and CDs.

Text
 

Rudee

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
11,218
2
76
"Downloading mp3s is ruled legal in Canada"

Good God man, did you even read the article? That's not what is victory is about.
rolleye.gif
 

brigden

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2002
8,702
2
81
I agree with the decision.

I hate to see law created solely to benefit massive corporations financially. The RIAA and its affiliates are obviously lobbying hardcore and its having a huge impact on the American litigation surrounding the issue of downloading music.

I think this perfectly highlights the inadequacies of the American justice system.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
55,863
14,002
146
Originally posted by: Rudee
"Downloading mp3s is ruled legal in Canada"

You need to read the article. That's not what the article is saying.

Hey, Rudee, are you ever going to let us know what TV station aired that ignorant BS about Subway?
 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,941
5
0
Originally posted by: Rudee
"Downloading mp3s is ruled legal in Canada"

Good God man, did you even read the article? That's not what is victory is about.
rolleye.gif

What are you talking about? This is what it says, and infact it's been ruled a long time ago. Why they specifically went after kazaa users is how the Canadian copyright law is written. You can download, copy, etc material just fine... it's the DISTRIBUTION of the files that's the problem. Those that distribute it, are breaking the law. So they went after kazaa users, since they were saying that any user that uses kazaa, is also uploading, and thus distributing the material at the same time.

Canada deems P2P downloading legal

So show me in that first article where it says otherwise? Did YOU not read this line: He said that downloading a song or making files available in shared directories, like those on Kazaa, does not constitute copyright infringement under the current Canadian law
 

PanzerIV

Diamond Member
Dec 19, 2002
6,875
1
0
The name "Justice Konrad von Finckenstein" had my phony meter on high alert but apparently this is legit. Go Canada!
 

kag

Golden Member
May 21, 2001
1,677
0
76
www.boloxe.com
It does not say it's legal to download MP3s, it says you can put MP3 files in your shared folder and also that ISPs are not forced to give out the information behind IP addresses...

I am with Aliant, which is owned by Bell Canada I believe.
 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,941
5
0
Originally posted by: kag
It does not say it's legal to download MP3s, it says you can put MP3 files in your shared folder and also that ISPs are not forced to give out the information behind IP addresses...

I am with Aliant, which is owned by Bell Canada I believe.

I guess you didn't read the 3rd sentence either... maybe i should bold that one as well.

Ok reread the article... i dumbed it down some more.
 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,352
259
126
I agree with the decision.

I hate to see law created solely to benefit massive corporations financially. The RIAA and its affiliates are obviously lobbying hardcore and its having a huge impact on the American litigation surrounding the issue of downloading music.

I think this perfectly highlights the inadequacies of the American justice system.
Then a law created solely to benefit corporations is exactly what you'll get. This ruling is so hostile to copyright holders on its face and absurd in its substance that it leaves copyright holders no other choice but to increase their efforts to have the law changed in their favor.

Canadian copyright law indeed is reasonably read to encompass file trading as copyright infringement, but when activist judges refuse to uphold the law or protect copyright owners based on an interpretation that experts in Canadian copyright law describe as "stunning" and "surprising", what you're inviting is for the law to be changed in a way that removes all room for interpretation and discretion.

In the sense this is the kind of activist ruling that always serves as the impetus for sweeping changes in the law, you are correct that it highlights the inadequacies of the American justice system, and it would seem, the Canadian system as well.
 

Dean

Platinum Member
Oct 10, 1999
2,757
0
0
Originally posted by: tcsenter
I agree with the decision.

I hate to see law created solely to benefit massive corporations financially. The RIAA and its affiliates are obviously lobbying hardcore and its having a huge impact on the American litigation surrounding the issue of downloading music.

I think this perfectly highlights the inadequacies of the American justice system.
Then a law created solely to benefit corporations is exactly what you'll get. This ruling is so hostile to copyright holders on its face and absurd in its substance that it leaves copyright holders no other choice but to increase their efforts to have the law changed in their favor.

Canadian copyright law indeed is reasonably read to encompass file trading as copyright infringement, but when activist judges refuse to uphold the law or protect copyright owners based on an interpretation that experts in Canadian copyright law describe as "stunning" and "surprising", what you're inviting is for the law to be changed in a way that removes all room for interpretation and discretion.

In the sense this is the kind of activist ruling that always serves as the impetus for sweeping changes in the law, you are correct that it highlights the inadequacies of the American justice system, and it would seem, the Canadian system as well.


The sad part is, the laws in Canada that is apparently holding the music industry back now, that they are so seemingly shocked by, are the same laws they pushed to create not so many years ago. They had no complaints collecting their little tax on blank media back then(or now for that matter). They will have one huge uphill battle if they think they can push for more change. The more they seem to fight, the more the door gets slammed in their face.

 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,101
5,640
126
Originally posted by: Dean
Originally posted by: tcsenter
I agree with the decision.

I hate to see law created solely to benefit massive corporations financially. The RIAA and its affiliates are obviously lobbying hardcore and its having a huge impact on the American litigation surrounding the issue of downloading music.

I think this perfectly highlights the inadequacies of the American justice system.
Then a law created solely to benefit corporations is exactly what you'll get. This ruling is so hostile to copyright holders on its face and absurd in its substance that it leaves copyright holders no other choice but to increase their efforts to have the law changed in their favor.

Canadian copyright law indeed is reasonably read to encompass file trading as copyright infringement, but when activist judges refuse to uphold the law or protect copyright owners based on an interpretation that experts in Canadian copyright law describe as "stunning" and "surprising", what you're inviting is for the law to be changed in a way that removes all room for interpretation and discretion.

In the sense this is the kind of activist ruling that always serves as the impetus for sweeping changes in the law, you are correct that it highlights the inadequacies of the American justice system, and it would seem, the Canadian system as well.


The sad part is, the laws in Canada that is apparently holding the music industry back now, that they are so seemingly shocked by, are the same laws they pushed to create not so many years ago. They had no complaints collecting their little tax on blank media back then(or now for that matter). They will have one huge uphill battle if they think they can push for more change. The more they seem to fight, the more the door gets slammed in their face.

Exactly, they are already being compensated and are trying to have it both ways. Remove the tax on recordable media or STFU Music Industry!