Text: Small Text  Normal Text  Large Text  Larger Text
  • Blog
  • Hurt Locker File Sharing Suits Come North: Federal Court Orders ISPs to Disclose Subscriber Info

Blog Archive

PrevPrevApril 2014NextNext
SMTWTFS
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930

Hurt Locker File Sharing Suits Come North: Federal Court Orders ISPs to Disclose Subscriber Info

PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Friday September 09, 2011
File sharing lawsuits involving the movie the Hurt Locker have been big news in the United States for months as tens of thousands of lawsuits have been filed. It now appears that the lawsuits are coming to Canada as the Federal Court of Canada has paved the way for the identification of subscribers at Bell Canada, Cogeco, and Videotron who are alleged to have copied the movie.  Late last month the court ordered the three ISPs to disclose the names and addresses of subscribers linked to IP addresses alleged to have copied the movie. The ISPs were given two weeks to respond and are entitled to be reimbursed for their expenses. In reaching its decision, the court cited the BMG Canada v. Doe case, the last major Canadian case involving peer-to-peer file sharing lawsuits. That case opened the door to further lawsuits, though it established some privacy safeguards. In this instance, the court cited PIPEDA as evidence that the personal information can be disclosed as well as federal court rules for the legitimacy of the claim and the necessity of acquiring the information for the lawsuit to proceed. There is no indication that the ISPs challenged the order or that there was an opportunity for a public interest intervention as was the case in the earlier CRIA lawsuits.

It is worth noting that the industry was specifically asked about the prospect of Hurt Locker lawsuits coming to Canada earlier this year.  At the Bill C-32 hearing, NDP MP Charlie Angus had the following exchange with movie industry representatives:

Angus: The issue of safe harbours comes up again and again. I'm trying to get a sense of where we would want to have our legislation come down, because the issue of enabling massive copyright infringement is something we all have a stake in stopping. There is concern about sweeping up all kinds of people in the wake. In the U.S. we saw 5,000 John Doe lawsuits on The Hurt Locker. That was followed by 20,000 lawsuits for five films, followed by 30,000 lawsuits. This is being brought by the U.S. copyright group. In their John Doe lawsuits, basically they track anybody and they go after the ISPs. Would you support provisions like that here in Canada?

Ted East: We're not interested in sweeping up the John Does. We're looking for legislation that basically stops online piracy and illegal file sharing, which requires changes to the bill that exists. Whatever laws we have here are going to be different from those in the United States. As Patrick referred to earlier, we need massive education, because a significant portion of the population in Canada, particularly younger people, have grown up in an environment where piracy seems to be okay, where it has no consequences. We have notice and notice, but everybody that they know is doing it, so changes have to be made.

The prospect of thousands of Canadian peer-to-peer file sharing lawsuits - with potential liability of tens of thousands dollars per person for a single movie - highlights why the government was right in Bill C-32 to reform the statutory damages provision to distinguish between commercial and non-commercial infringement.  Non-commercial infringement was capped under the bill at $5000 for all infringements, though it can go far lower.  This case confirms that mass lawsuits with the threat of thousands in liability is a real possibility in Canada and why changes to the law are needed.
Comments (72)add comment

asdf said:

Hrm...
And what about the legality of shotgunning accusations at an IP? Your IP can always be compromised, it doesn't necessarily mean the owner of the IP was the one pirating the movie.

But I guess they're just interested in getting the money, doesn't really who was actually responsible or not.
September 09, 2011

davegravy said:

@asdf
If you've got the balls and wallet to go to court and argue that, PLEASE do it.

Though not in Canada, some precedent has finally been set in this regard: http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...ica/index+(Ars+Technica+-+Featured+Content)
September 09, 2011

loser pay said:

...
What about the "loser pays" principle for civil law suits in Canada?

Would the plaintiff(s) have to pay for the legal bills for (often a high percentage of) innocent people that are named in this type of shotgun lawsuits?

I hope Canadian are still protected by that.
September 09, 2011

asdf said:

@loser pay
I fear that the legal bills must be paid up front, or as the battle goes, and then at the very end the winner is reimbursed.

Still takes a lot of initial capital, especially if the plaintiff in this case just draws the whole thing out on purpose to suck the defendant dry of money so they can't proceed and have to give up. The system is deeply flawed.
September 09, 2011

Freeloader said:

No Rogers?
Good thing I always piggy back off open wifi when downloading movies... Not really, but seriosly. Hard to believe Rogers teksavvy and other ISPs werent targeted as well
September 09, 2011

Kenny said:

Open Wifi
I would donate to a defence fund for someone wrongly sued. I don't understand how they can start a lawsuit against someone without proof of who was actually using the connection. I run an open access point, and plan to continue doing so, so hopefully the judges are intelligent enough to throw these cases out.

All that's being accomplished is the downloading is being pushed further underground, and goodwill for the industry is being lost making people less likely to purchase movies at any price.
September 09, 2011

DFKnight said:

nod
Agree with what Kenny said.
September 09, 2011

Jumping Jehosophats said:

The Punishment Outweighs The Crime
I find it ludicrous to punish individuals for something the TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY is responsible for creating. Honestly, it's like leaving a case of beer at your house with your teen and telling them not to have a party.

I refuse to ever see 'The Hurt Locker' at this point. Never saw it in theatres, never downloaded it. But it makes no sense to go after the individuals.

September 09, 2011

Jumping Jehosophats said:

Another Method of compensating film makers
A few nights ago, I downloaded a certain documentary using a torrent. Reason: I could not find it on Netflix, nor or iTunes (though it has been on both in the past, for some reason it has been pulled from both places)

I have decided to not only make a donation to the charity that was the subject of the doc, but also to find a way to give the film-makers $20, which I figure is a fair price to pay for a dvd of the film... and a far better portion of profit than they would get if I bought it at HMV, for instance.
September 09, 2011

Chris C. said:

The only solution for consumers at this point is ...
... to protest with our wallets and REFUSE to purchase anything related to this movie.

This is another example why it is urgent for our democracies to be overhauled and the industry lobby groups be declared illegal and their influence peddling activities be declared criminal, precisely because they have subverted democratic representation.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
September 09, 2011

S.J.Doe said:

sophisticatedjanedoe
Welcome to the club, Canada. An elite club: Germany, UK, US. This plague called speculative invoicing appeared to be more contagious than I expected. The crisis of this disease is behind us in US, thanks to recent judges' rulings and EFF (and I hope myself, just a little-little bit).

http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com

@fightcopytrolls on Twitter
September 09, 2011

Eric Hacke said:

Representation?
Would you (Michael Giest) consider representing someone charged in this case?

I'm not asking for myself, and I'm not asking for a firm commitment obviously, just whether it would be possible and if you'd consider it. You seem almost uniquely positioned to be a great advocate for the accused in this case, and would represent the interests of Canadians well.

I'd be very willing to contribute to a legal fund to finance your efforts, and I'm sure that through OpenMedia.ca we could drum up more than enough money for you to be adequately compensated throughout this process.
September 09, 2011

Jason K said:

...
The reason why people choose P2P, is because a market need for on demand stuff is not being met. It's going to be very hard to push forward with such lawsuits especially when there are value chains present around P2P and the sharing of media. It's a choice industry has made, and the consumer should not be penalized for it.

During the copyright consultations thousands of Canadians told our representatives that we did not want lawsuits like this. It was also the failure of Geist, and the Fair Copyright Movement that didn't push forward more of the economics and choices industry has had, instead settling for stat damages, rather than actually representing what actually was happening within the market, and with the economics around P2P file sharing. Hopefully some other smart lawyer will figure that out, and these arguments will have their day in court.

Now many Canadians are faced with the real prospect of huge lawsuits, legal bills and stress. Bravo!
September 09, 2011

Samuel said:

Damages
Where does actual vs punitive damages play in here. Actual would be like $20, so the law allows for punitive of 10s of thousands? Wouldn't a judge just award some minimal amount?
September 09, 2011

Crockett said:

Hey that didn't work ... lets try these shmucks.
I have been following the copyright troll 'business' in the USA since it broke out. I was at first horrified that this 'protection' racket was allowed to flourish but was equally pleased when the courts came to the realization of what it really was.

Recently the firms involved in bringing these lawsuits have been kicked to the curb and the blatantly income generating monster Righthaven has been fired.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/09/it-was-a-dumb-idea-newspaper-chain-fires-copyright-troll-righthaven.ars

But wait ... there's this untapped virgin territory to the North, and no modern copyright bill to protect them. Hmm, I wonder if the timing of this is tied to the release schedule of C-32 Redux? It would certainly give the Cons a rally point to 'fight against' the bad boys.

Well, its going to be an interesting ride.
September 09, 2011

dillyhammer said:

...
Interestingly, a US court has just ruled that an IP address alone is insufficient to identify a person. Given an IP address is so readily spoofed (anyone can download a file sitting on a server and make it look like Stephen Harper did it from his Blackberry), you have to wonder just how effective these potential suits will be once a litigious defendant with an p2p jones is picked on.
September 09, 2011

end user said:

...
Who ever got that letter just needs to buy a used copy of Hurt Locker and say that watching the movie beforehand made them buy it. Kinda like borrowing your firnds cd to listen to it before buying or going to HMV and listening to a cd before you buy it.
September 09, 2011

IamME said:

..
Time to investigate VPNs. I don't download anything that would hit the MPAA/RIAA/CRIA radar, but I'll be damned if I'll be tracked.
September 09, 2011

topgun said:

Define "copied"
You write:
It now appears that the lawsuits are coming to Canada as the Federal Court of Canada has paved the way for the identification of subscribers at Bell Canada, Cogeco, and Videotron who are alleged to have **copied** the movie. Late last month the court ordered the three ISPs to disclose the names and addresses of subscribers linked to IP addresses alleged to have copied the movie.

Does that word refer to uploaders or downloaders (clients)? From what I know, Canada has been looking for uploaders but were not much interested by uploaders. That would be a first.
September 09, 2011

Public Service said:

...
Strongvpn.com is a reliable VPN service with a good history, fast speeds, no caps and excellent 24/7 live customer service. I have used them for two years now. A annual plan works out to about $5 a month.
September 09, 2011

Tech42 said:

Privacy?
Rights exist up to the point where they become inconvenient for governments.

Don't make the mistake of thinking any "rights" are guaranteed.
September 09, 2011

Danux said:

Illegal?
"Ted East: ...We're looking for legislation that basically stops online piracy and illegal file sharing..."

Illegal? If it is already illegal, shouldn't there already be legislation in place to prosecute? Or is the statement meant to imply "...when we make it illegal..."
September 09, 2011

Jason said:

IP Address List
Can anyone find the list of IP addresses? I see in the ruling that they are in Appendix A, but I can't find the original filing, not even at the website for the federal court. Perhaps I just don't know where to look...
September 10, 2011

Jason K said:

...
Or perhaps all of this is politically motivated to fast track our copyright bill. Either I have never agreed to Geists take on copyright especially with audio/video media. All of this reeks of something beyond what has been reported here, especially after the cable leaks.
September 10, 2011

Gregg said:

So, why is Shaw encouraging downloading movies and music?
Doesn't the CPCC apply here?
September 10, 2011

Free Broadband said:

Let our ISPs pay
Let the ISPs PAY
Our ISPs have been charging us $40 a month for years and now trying to sell us even faster internet speeds for a premium price. Studies have been done all over the world proving that it would cost all citizens a few dollars a year in tax to have broad band broadcast-ed in each community as a standard utility. But alas the ISPs lobbied successfully to keep this from happening. What do you think people are doing with all the extra potential of these broadband connections. Not just surfing the web and video conferencing. That all takes less than 500kb/s to do effectively. THE ISPs SHOULD GO TO BAT FOR US AND HELP FIGHT THIS PROSECUTION OF THEIR VALUED CUSTOMERS.
September 10, 2011

so dan said:

...
In accordance with topgun's request, I too would like to know what counts as "copied". Is streaming (downloading) considered copying, or just uploading (as in P2P)?

If anyone knows, the information may be helpful to many.
September 10, 2011

WhatDyaExpect said:

Prentice Loves Arnie
What did you expect when Arnold showed up here and took Prentice out for a date.

Prentice's panties are still around his ankles....
September 10, 2011

Byte said:

The ONLY way to stop this
The ONLY way to stop the IP MAFIAA and their counterparts is to actually vote for a party that wants to change the law. For everyone that is "boycotting" there are 99 that are not. You don't like the rules + you get hurt or locked up for not following the rules = get the rules changed. Simple as that.
September 10, 2011

Nuitari said:

The ONLY way to stop this
Elect people who can stop this.
As long as bad laws are in place, this will keep happening.

September 11, 2011

FuzzyTheBear said:

What does the ISP sell ?
Videotron , Bell .. they al say faster movie downloads etc in their publicity. What you think are their responsibility for encouraging the behavior in the first place ?

They should bear the load.Not the end user.
September 11, 2011

Andre said:

Canadians are not Americans I hope
These MAFIAA lawsuits are not about trying to slow down or stop pirating, it's just another source of income. What I think is that Canadians will react differently then Americans who just pretty much ignored those who were being sued (except for the occasional organization that helped here and there) and well will let the MAFIAA know there's no place for this here etc. etc. at least that's what I'm hoping.

As for the MAFIAA just another example of why free market is so bad for countries and it's people.
September 11, 2011

Crockett said:

A muddy, mucky, slippery slope ...
The combination of this news and the apparent intention of the harper government to allow the hand over of private personal information without a court order (see upcoming crime omnibus bill), lead one to wonder if we are in for this ...

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/09/sanctioned-p2p-lawyer-fined-10000-for-staggering-chutzpah.ars
September 11, 2011

Doug Webb said:

All parties are equally indoctrinated with media lies
If you write to each of the party leaders you will get the same response from each of them. They all parrot the media companies manufactured 'facts'. We don't have the financial resources to pay to lobby MP's with the truth, so they don't know anything but what the media companies tell them. Even though everything they hear is a lie, they blissfully ignore everything else because it doesn't come with a donation. As in the US you buy the Canadian laws you want with political donations. The conservatives are eliminating the government funding of elections so this problem will get worse. There is one more movie that I will buy when it comes out and then my collection will be complete. I won't be buying any more movies or any other entertainment, that is my response to the media companies tactics. That is what I recommend to everyone. Stop consuming content from media companies, enjoy what you have and say, I just don't need any more of this kind of entertainment.
September 11, 2011

AmazedQuebecer said:

...
I find it suspicious that Telus is not named in the court's decision. They are probably bigger than Cogeco canada wide. That being said, the ISPs named are the main ones in Québec. Most Quebecers had only access to the French version of the Hurt Locker (Le Démineur) distributed by Maple Picture (The DVD contains no english soundtrack). Another version with only the english soundtrack was available but not widely distributed in Québec.

The videoclubs in Québec, ironically Videotron, and retail stores (Including Archambault!) only had that french version in stock as well. With no reasonable alternatives, those who wanted to see the movie with its original soundtrack probably had to download it even if they really wanted to buy it or rent it. Since there was no actual loss because the movie was not available in any reasonable alternative ways; is it still a crime?

I really thought that this nonsense was only happening south of the border. I guess with enough money and power; everything is possible.
September 11, 2011

Racquel said:

time to get oranized
This is just a start for massive extortion pattern.

They will force you to settle for 7k$ instead of going on trial where you could loose all you have.

Some of us has to stand and need feeding to troll and resist. Time to create a foundation for this soon to become legalize extortion.
September 11, 2011

Sam said:

Stop consuming
I agree with Doug. I had a whole list of Blu-rays that I was waiting to buy when they came out, but to heck with it. I also love to go to the movies; now I think I'll only go when I have enough points or passes to watch them for free. I guess they just want to alienate the younger popluation, probably their BIGGEST customer. Maybe I'll just read the book instead.

We now live in an era (Great Recession, anyone?) where entertainment has become more and more of a luxury. With the Internet available of amazingly fast portable devices like tablets and dual-core smartphones, TVs are starting to become extinct. I personally avoid wasting my time with it. Are these great and wise entertainment companies hastening our need to cut out the unecessary?

I'm looking forward to it, I think television is one of the worst things to happen to humankind, but I guess that's an extreme view. But do think about it...What happened when the power went out back in 2001? I personally had a blast with my family.
September 11, 2011

Warlock said:

Maybe they were invited
Maybe they were invited in by Maxime Bernier or Zoe Addington so in the end people would beg for C-32 to pass with the 'non-commercial' copyright clause as the salvation for all Canadians included in this madness.

After all, why perpetuate a failed scheme in a foreign country that can see it coming?
September 12, 2011

Anonymous said:

We don't need no Internet.
Well.. We all got addicted because of file sharing.

Why in the first place, in the nineties everybody want to buy a computer? To copy music and movies.

Now, with those things going on, nobody will want a computer or a high speed internet services.

Great! But wait a minute... does those addicted can be cured?

September 12, 2011

IamME said:

re: We don't need no Internet.
I had a computer long before the Internet was publicly available, when the fastest connection I could get was 2400baud over dial-up to a local BBS and 1M of RAM was $100. You're not downloading much at 2400 bit/second (That's 400B/s). At that speed, it would take 3 - 4 hours to download a single song of average quality and length. I didn't buy a computer to "copy music and movies", computers in those days couldn't handle such things, at least not well. I think your opinion is a misnomer that unfairly paints all computer users as so-called "pirates". If you're not downloading P2P, you must not need a computer or a high-speed Internet connection? hmmm All those millions of NetFlix users and all those who play the various on-line games such as WoW and Everquest, will probably disagree with your view on the need of high-speed. Remember, "legal" streaming media is the #1 consumer of Internet bandwidth.

Public Services, thanks for the tip on StrongVPN.
September 12, 2011

Racquel said:

think of this as an extortion
There's a lot of thing to be clarified in this case. The track people that were downloading/sharing their movie they had to distribute their own movie(thats the way p2p work) That means its like at wallmart the store director give u a chopcolat taken form the shelf and tell you you wont have to pay....thnik of it.
September 12, 2011

Richard said:

What's Next...
Will they be coming after me for Watching Movies online in my Browser? Soo many Sites that offer that these days for free.. One has to wonder if the movie Companies will be coming after my IP address for that now..
September 12, 2011

Roger said:

Canadians elected the right team
@Nuitari:

>Elect people who can stop this.

You mean like King Ha Ha Ha Harper and his minions? They are vicious defenders of rights. Corporate rights, that is, not citizens' rights (appearances while they need your vote notwithstanding).

Ha, ha , ha, ha, ha , ha, ha, ha , ha, ha, ha , ha, ha, ha , ha, ha ... duped.
September 12, 2011

Joe said:

done as well
Enough is enough, their greed has made me join the others. I won't be purchasing another form of audio/video, unless directly from the artists web site. I am going home and cancelling my cable tv, like all my friends have been trying to convince me to do.
They put out crap like the Smurfs and wonder why they are losing money or why someone wouldn't want to psend 100 dollars to take the family to a piece of crap like that. Instead of spending all this money on lawyers maybe they should consider retaining some actual writers who have talent.
September 13, 2011

davegravy said:

VPN
I'd much rather give my money to a VPN service than those MAFIAA rats.
September 13, 2011

IamME said:

RE VPN
If you get a VPN make sure it's hosted outside of North America, otherwise, depending on your goals, it's almost as useless as a regular ISP.
September 13, 2011

Dan Landrigan said:

Dan
Why not go after the people who put the film on in the first place. Once it is on the air waves isn't it free game for anyone?
September 13, 2011

hermaninc said:

hermaninc
So a crappy movie that barely grossed more than it cost is trying to drive up revenue by sueing people. What a joke..
September 13, 2011

jean lachapelle said:

hummm think please
block buster is no longer and internet price in quebec canada is average minimum 40 dollars a month than if we can get brought to court for getting movies or music because the states says we must when now the world is pirating everywhere this is getting ridiculeous cause why pay 40 dollars a month to go on facebook or msn that are the few free programs available on internet cause this all you will be able to do soon , internet never was meant to protect copyrights for anyone but was more a open sharing mind thinking since then everything was to be free and open now nothing is free and really every one has copyrights on pictures or videos of them self and documents etc... so everyone can bring to court others if in beetween users we promote a movie to see and influence others to see it than fine but if we download the crapiest version of it to see if it worth bying or going to see in theater you are now a pirate well there full of ...... they even get us by falls publicity on television only showing good parts of a movie that is 90 pourcent of the time disapointing lately so i think the canadian gouvernement should just go back to the way it was when we use to rent a movie and copy it on a vhs what is the difference really ???? how many persons in canada had to go to court for doing this and how many did not do it ????? maybe copyrights can go back even beetween movie producer using technology developpers tools created by other in other productions and are they using pc and internet for special effects ???? if it keeps going no one will be able to do anything on internet but still a 40 dollars plan minimum avery month to do what ???? this will kill internet providers big time cause i predict the lost of interest for internet the day canadian cannot get any free movies or musics this will be the end of internet power for familly in canada
September 13, 2011

jean lachapelle said:

internet
the company such has bell, videotron gets beetween 40 and 120 dollars a month for internet access and beside msn or facebook what is still free on internet???? what is different beetween renting a vhs and copying it on another vhs who did not do it ????? now the persons less fortunate download movies online most of the time crapy copy and 90 pourcent of the movies do false publicity showing the best part of movies on television and create many deception lately when you actually see the movie and our gourvernement should stop the procedure against canadians cause all canadians did exactly the same has the guilty person did and many kids download movies and songs from internet if we bring those persons to court than may has well bring the entire canadians familly cause we pay to mutch for our internet and if canadian familly can,t download movies or musics anymore than bye bye internet all toghetter canadian familly will disconnect and internet never was meant to protect copyrights it was suposed to open communications and exchange knowledge and share so now all was good in internet has become paranoia for all canadians and someone has to stop this non-sence
September 13, 2011

hmmmmm said:

privacy
the canadians can handle their own in house due to the privacy act. leave them alone to deal with it.
September 13, 2011

gary said; said:

levy on harddrive
put a levy on any devices with a harddrive like blank cd on music,so there will be no more law suits.
September 13, 2011

asdf said:

@gary
Give me a break. I hope that was sarcastic, because it is among the dumbest ideas I've heard so far.
September 14, 2011

Danux said:

Counter Sueing
So, would this mean that "The Hurt Locker" crew is liable for producing an un-entertaining piece of media? I mean, if they can sue for a lost sale, why can't citizens sue for a misrepresented product? Really, "The Hurt Locker" was bad enough that it was grounds to rationalize a "try before you buy" attitude toward Hollywood. It seems to me that if Canada is going to go down this legal road, grounds for liability should be a two-way street.
September 14, 2011

Gregg said:

@ Gary
The MAFIAA already gets more coin percentage wise from Canada than any other country in the world... why would you even suggest that?
September 15, 2011

Crockett said:

And so it begins ...
Well, that didn't take long. The scum are coming out of the shadows and targeting the most vunerable members of our society.

http://torrentfreak.com/canadian-police-issue-file-sharing-scam-letters-fraud-warning-110915/

I can not say how disappointed I am that this type of activity has been allowed to be 'exported' to our shores. It is widely recognized in the USA that this type of activity, fraudulent AND genuine, is a predatory misuse of the legal system.

Just as it is being squashed there, the ever greedy and short sighted 'media lobby' is looking for smoother waters to dump their garbage.

Good job Canada ... I hope this type of silliness will be addressed in C-32 redux.
September 15, 2011

Crockett said:

And even much, much worse ...
http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...ftware.ars

A couple of months ago I pointed out the use of the cleanfeed IP blocking software to combat 'Hollywood' file sharing would have disastrous results. I was ridiculed by certain copyright purists, but I am very sorry to have now be proven right.

The cleanfeed software has been used mainly to block access to child p@rn and done a reasonable job at it. I warned that using this same system to battle 'hurt locker' type infringement would essentially be painting a big red target on this blocking system.

Now, I in no way endorse or applaud those who hacked this system ... but the audacity of Hollywood to endanger children by contributing to the compromising of this system just to further line their pockets, is hypocrisy to a new low level.

This is one time I am really sorry to have to say I told you so.
September 15, 2011

Crockett said:

Another prognosticator ...
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/ar...child-porn

I wrote a piece on John Degen's site [johndegen.com], where he was talking about the bully tactics of the 'free culture crowd'. I pointed out that bullies come in cashmere suits too, but I'm not sure that point got through.

My post has since dissipated but I will give the benefit of doubt as it may of just been the content filter, p@rn is not always a allowable topic of conversation even when speaking of protecting children.
September 15, 2011

Dr. Steve Williamson said:

A quick cash-grab attempt for producers (Voltage Pictures) of a mediocre film!
Once again:

U.S. Money buys people, judges, courts in Canada;

It is no surprise that the Federal Court in Montreal granted the order, given they received a cash-gift of an unmentioned U.S. lobby group.

The Hurt Locker was such a waste of MY money (spent for cinema tickets, and I want a REFUND) I fully understand that nobody is buying it on DVD or Blu-Ray.

I am being generous in saying it was 'mediocre,' actually a worthless piece of cr*p movie(!)

Voltage Pictures, who have NEVER EVER produced ANYTHING worthwhile, are trying to compensate for their losses, by bribing a bribable Canadian court, which should have dismissed the order, period.

What is their problem in the U.S. anyways? They can shut down ANY website, service or technology via the FBI, if it deems such as partaking in copyright infringement (they already did that this year, by taking over and blocking the Webregistrars of such websites).

The technology has to be stopped, not the people using it. Since this seems to be impossible for them, they resort to ILLEGAL Gestapo methods per se, which is why we should continue to fight ANY U.S. intrusion into our own laws, which WE (Canadians) make, NOT the US of A.

Charlie Anhus is dead on here, calling them "shakedown lawsuits," and truly, I would add, cheap cash grab attempts.

Note that in 2-3 years from now, given Moore's Law of computing, with proper compression, we will be able to email movies to our friends. Also, an entire batch of 1000+ movies will fit onto a USB-stick, which anyone can pop into the mail, and send to anywhere!!!

In sum:

I recommend NEVER EVER to watch, buy or rent ANY FILM henceforth produced by Voltage Pictures.

That is the power of the consumer, vs. creators of worthless 'art,' CHEATING a paying cinema audience, and corporate greed!

Dr. Steve Williamson
Toronto, ON
September 15, 2011

Tom said:

ISPS sold out names to warn people buy our TV products or else
IT used to be that Bell told you not to worry about all those threats that came from movie production companies, now that they sell TV and movies, which provide more revenue, they want people to stop downloading. The iSPS sold out there customers as a warning to other stop or we will throw you under the bus. I wonder how long they kept user logs for without a legitimate reason. If i were those 30 people I'd look into suing the isps for violating privacy issues.

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act
»laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts···e-3.html

Section 7, here's a snippet:

Collection without knowledge or consent

7. (1) For the purpose of clause 4.3 of Schedule 1, and despite the note that accompanies that clause, an organization may collect personal information without the knowledge or consent of the individual only if

(a) the collection is clearly in the interests of the individual and consent cannot be obtained in a timely way;

(b) it is reasonable to expect that the collection with the knowledge or consent of the individual would compromise the availability or the accuracy of the information and the collection is reasonable for purposes related to investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada or a province;

(c) the collection is solely for journalistic, artistic or literary purposes;

(d) the information is publicly available and is specified by the regulations; or

(e) the collection is made for the purpose of making a disclosure

(i) under subparagraph (3)(c.1)(i) or (d)(ii), or

(ii) that is required by law.
September 21, 2011

march said:

open wifi ?
mmmmm to me all this is a simple money grabber from a small studio and it ain't the way to go because peoples will be fed up by those actions and one day they will leave the movie indstry for this case if this goes throught it sets a dangerous precedent to innocents open internet connections owners (around you neighborhood)because if someone used an open connection in fact he used someone else IP but that same IP IS the one used to download the said movie
September 21, 2011

maryjohn said:

maryjohn
Thanks for sharing the information!
I found this article very interesting and informative!
Keep sharing!

buy xanax online
February 28, 2012

maryjohn said:

maryjohn
Really i appreciate the effort you made to share the knowledge.The topic here i found was really effective to the topic which i was researching for a long time

http://www.mycarepharmacy.com/buy_online/alprazolam/xanax
February 28, 2012

http://www.mycarepharmacy.com/buy_online/phentermine/k25 said:

buy phentermine online
Preservation and promotion of health is achieved through a combination of physical, mental and social well-being, sometimes called "the triangle of health." Health is a positive concept focuses on the social and personal resources, as well as physical capacities.
February 28, 2012

tim davidson said:

joe 6-pack
it would seem that for now, individual canadians are basicaly immune from any legal falout from file sharing. the people that generate any kind of profit from file sharing would be the ones looking over their shoulder. this subject was never on my radar until telus barked at me to put an end to it when one of our teenagers put bittorrent on my laptop. after back and forth emails it turned out more like a polite request than a legal threat. initially i found and removed the bit torrent program but now, after a little reading, will allow it until there is some kind of a legal hassle or threat of one. for now it seems to be all bark with no bite, lets hope it stays that way.
March 02, 2012

john 6 pack said:

case withdrawn
It would seem that they've decided to withdraw the case. They might be back in 6 months with 20000 IP address, though...there appears to be a court decision supporting their right to get names of account holders from ISP...
March 29, 2012

john 6 pack said:

here is the link to the court info
http://www.ippractice.ca/file-...=T-1373-11
March 29, 2012

celine purse said:

celine purse
Dealing with the purse trend, most recently, Celine Bag: http://www.celinetoteshop.com will probably assert might be the chief from get noticed; upcoming simple

and easy wind,
July 02, 2012

bowen said:

bags for women
Thanks for the info. This is just what I was looking for.bags for women I am currently researching this topic so I will be back.
September 24, 2012

lisa said:

bags
for a long time I have been a frequent follower of your blogposts and of course continue to do so.http://www.bagsforwomen.org/The content here is great.
September 24, 2012

lily said:

women bags
Please let me know if you’re looking for a author for your site. You have some really great articles and I think I would be a good asset. [http://www.bagsforwomen.org http://www.bagsforwomen.org]
September 24, 2012

buy diablo 3 gold guide said:

buy diablo 3 gold guide
Please let me know if you’re looking for a author for your site. You have some really great articles and I think I would be a good asset. [http://www.bagsforwomen.org http://www.bagsforwomen.org]
February 22, 2013

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
Tags:
, , , ,
Share: Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterEmailPrintPDF
Related Items: