The Wire Report reports (sub req) that NGN Prima Productions has dropped its copyright lawsuit over alleged file sharing by subscribers of Distributel, an independent ISP operating in Quebec, Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia. Distributel fought back against a motion to disclose the names of its subscribers earlier this year, an approach that appears to have been vindicated by the decision to drop its motion to compel disclosure of subscriber names.
NGN Drops File Sharing Lawsuit Involving Distributel Subscribers
November 5, 2013
Share this post
One Comment

Law Bytes
Episode 271: Taking Stock of a Wild Week in Canadian Digital Policy With the Online Streaming Reversal, AI Strategy Release, and Lawful Access Review
byMichael Geist

May 25, 2026
Michael Geist
May 11, 2026
Michael Geist
May 4, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
You Can’t Put the Toothpaste Back in the Tube: Why the Government’s Reported “Temporary” Plan for a Kids’ Social Media Ban Would Mean Mandated ID for Everyone
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 271: Taking Stock of a Wild Week in Canadian Digital Policy With the Online Streaming Reversal, AI Strategy Release, and Lawful Access Review
Canadian American Business Council on Bill C-22: It “Threatens Our Bilateral Partnership on Data Security”
AI for All, Details to Follow: Government Releases a Big-Spending AI Strategy That Is Still Short on the Specifics That Matter
New Privacy Rights in the Morning, Mandatory Metadata Retention in the Afternoon: How Bill C-22 Undercuts the AI Strategy Before It Launches

:Law practices founded on made up claims
ISPs contesting demands to disclose information were one of the notable factors in the demise of Patent Troll firm Prenda law.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenda_Law
“Prenda’s practice is to first file federal copyright infringement lawsuits against fictitiously-named “John Doe” defendants, and to then issue subpoenas to the Internet service providers (ISPs) associated with those IP addresses.
…
In a footnote, Wright wryly observed that $81,319.72 “is calculated to be just below the cost of an effective appeal”, a nod to his finding that plaintiffs’ settlement demands were set “just below the cost of a bare-bones defense”.
…”