Must Reads

The Legal Case Against isoHunt

The Globe and Mail covers the legal case against isoHunt, with discussion of the Canadian recording industry’s lawsuit against the site using existing law. The article suggests that CRIA has filed cease and desist letters against the site (using existing law) in addition to the statement of claim and statement of defence, both of which rely on current Canadian law to argue that isoHunt is not operating lawfully in Canada.

11 Comments


  1. I’ll leave it to the courts to decide if it is legal or not.

    However, from a practical point of view, and given that:

    – it it always quoted in the US IP related pressures against Canada
    – the whole P2P thing has created the opportunity to introduce “throttling” and “UBB”

    I think that Canada on a whole would be better off without it.

    Nap.

  2. Yet Sookman still falsely claims that isoHunt started the whole lawsuit first.

    CRIA and Sookman’s law firm filed the C&D’s first.

  3. They filed the same C&D notice to isoHunt that they filed to other torrent sites that were hosted in Canada at the time, like Demonoid. (yes it used to be hosted in quebec) As well as Sumotorrent to name a couple. The latter 2 sites moved hosting almost immediately, so I guess Canadian copyright law doesn’t work still.

  4. I’m not sure you are making your point?
    @Spikey “The latter 2 sites moved hosting almost immediately, so I guess Canadian copyright law doesn’t work still.”

    I’m not sure what you mean by the law not working, the site [Demonoid] for instance has stopped operating in Canada, so it has proven to be effective in stopping an infringing site from operating here. The fact that it is now operating out of the Ukraine has nothing to do with Canada at all, our laws do not apply there nor over the whole global-sphere for that matter.

  5. Whoops!
    Spikey, Were you being sarcastic and I missed it? 0_o

  6. Obvious question? Why is IsoHunt so different from Google? Do they host infringing content?

  7. @Jesse
    The simple answer is that Google has deep pockets. The slightly more complex version is that by going after smaller entities like isoHunt, etc, the CRIA can set a precedent which can be used against the bigger fish.


  8. At some point the big fish should spend some money on lobbying otherwise they will become small fish.

    Nap.

  9. At some point the big fish should spend money on being fraudulent, pathetic criminals otherwise they will become small fish.


  10. @crade: “At some point the big fish should spend money on being fraudulent, pathetic criminals otherwise they will become small fish. ”

    You know a system to be completely corrupt when in order to achieve any legal objective, you must go through intermediate illegal steps.

    Nap.

  11. @Napalm
    Can the big fish get, what is it called, intervener status in the case?

    Otherwise they risk political intervention in the case.