Recording Industry Keeps Quiet About Canadian IsoHunt Lawsuit; Didn't Want To Admit Canada Has Strong Copyright

from the funny-how-that-works dept

Tue, Feb 15th 2011 7:36am — Mike Masnick

Michael Geist has the news that last year, at some point, the recording industry filed a lawsuit against IsoHunt in Canada. There's already been an ongoing lawsuit against IsoHunt in the US, but not too many people realized there was a similar lawsuit in Canada. And that's for a specific reason: the recording industry did their best to keep it quiet. The lawsuit was filed just a few weeks before Canada's latest attempt at copyright reform was put forth and a big part of the narrative for why such a law was needed was because Canadian copyright laws weren't strong enough to go after a site like IsoHunt. So, making a big stink about a lawsuit -- under those existing copyright laws -- against IsoHunt would have hurt that story... Of course, this raises the question: if existing copyright laws were strong enough, why did politicians and industry lobbyists claim they were not?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: canada, copyright
Companies: cria, isohunt

28 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

The eejit (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 6:47am

For the cash. For corrupt fuckwits, it's always about self-benefit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
crade (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 7:28am

I don't think we can beat the lobbyists anymore.. The canadian public has been fighting against more restrictive non stop for a decade or more, but we can't do anything about the source. The siege never ends.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 7:50am
  
  Re:
  Oh, of course we can beat the lobbyists. Just, not at their own game. Like that old bit of wisdom goes: if winning the game is impossible, change the game.
  
  I wonder perhaps if it will take a massive rally (� la Tunisia & Egypt) to get the US Wall Street-oriented power structure turned back around to "for the people, by the people."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Hephaestus (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 7:59am
    
    Re: Re:
    "if winning the game is impossible, change the game."
    
    Thats one of my favorite methods for winning. :) Don't play by their rules.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Eggman, 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:08am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I must play this game by my rules
      I will conquer the world with my tools
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - CommonSense (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:31am
    
    Re: Re:
    Just let me know when and where... I'll be there.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Qritiqal (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:10am
  
  Re:
  There is a simple way to beat the lobbyists:
  
  1) become informed
  2) stop buying the product and services of any companies involved with those lobbyists
  3) get everyone you know to stop buying the products and services of any companies involved with those lobbyists
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - crade (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:22am
    
    Re: Re:
    I've been boycotting them for ages. They aren't funded by Canadians anyway.
    
    It's true their attack on their own customers has obviously got to be Kamikaze, and eventually they will die, but they are going to screw us irrevocably first.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - jilocasin (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:26am
    
    Nice idea, but it'll never work.
    That's a nice idea but it'll never work.
    
    Number 1, 'become informed':
    
    Always a good idea.
    
    Number 2, 'stop buying the product and services of any companies involved with those lobbyists'
    
    First problem, unless you run off into the mountains (desert) and live an entirely self sufficient existance you can't avoid lobbiests. The only companies that don't utilize lobiests, wish they were big enough to hire a few. If you managed to only buy products from companies that don't have lobiests, they would just pass laws making it illegal _not_ to do business with them. (You think I'm joking, then you haven't been paying attention. Think Apple & appstore or Bose suing resellers.)
    
    Number 3, 'get everyone you know to stop buying the products and services of any companies involved with those lobbyists'
    
    See answer to number 2.
    
    The only way to stop lobbiests are to have our government represent the people and do what's best for the country as a whole. This would be a marked change from the current system of padding their own bank accounts.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Emil A. Georgiev, 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:18am

Re
The lawsuit in the US went bad for isoHunt. What is the current status in Canada?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:25am

So Masnick, why haven't you commented on yesterday's round of ICE seizures? Is it because none of your precious music piracy sites were targeted? Or is it because you realize these seizures are legal and you don't want another reminder about owing MusiCares $500?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:36am
  
  Re:
  If you'd like to submit a story, use the submission page rather than the comment forms.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 8:55am
  
  Re:
  Looks like a piece referring to the new seizures is up. Maybe you should look over the site instead of being a dickwad?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RD, 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:11am
  
  Re:
  "Or is it because you realize these seizures are legal and you don't want another reminder about owing MusiCares $500?"
  
  Why would he owe musicares $500? Show us the judgment from a court that the seizures were argued at trial and declared legal.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:12am
  
  Re:
  Heh, you're not paying attention. Like, at all. You're nothing more than an idiot. At least I live up to my name.
  
  Or are you from the Fox News ideology of news: make shit up and yell until it sinks in. 'cause it ain't working here, bud.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Berenerd (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:15am
  
  Re:
  Honestly, perhaps he needs more than 24 hours to...you know...post anything about it? Might be researching? gathering information? Go away little boy, your mommy is calling.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Marcus Carab (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:44am
    
    Re: Re:
    The best part is, when a new post does go up, ACs like this go over it with a fine-toothed comb for any tiny thing they can call an error or an omission, and then lambast Mike for not being thorough in his research
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:59am

Actually, Canadian copyright laws are weak, and punish non-pirating users by putting all sorts of surcharges on blank media and media devices. The situation also encourages piracy, and Canada is more and more finding itself on the outside on copyright issues.

Canada is one of the biggest trading partners with the US, and I think they will realize that they sort of need to get in line with overall policy, rather than being a haven for file traders (and war deserters...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:12am
  
  Re:
  They're not weak. Charging everyone a tax so that the3y can subsidise another nation's works is at best immoral, and at worst extortion.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- crade (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:27am
  
  Re:
  Actually, no, they aren't. The encourages piracy retoric is just a load of crap supported by nothing. Our levy is pretty much a non-issue altogether. There are special "music" cd's that you can pay extra for if you really want to, and having the levy supposedly allows Canadians to make personal copies of music we already have a license for (which is allowed in most other places anyway). Doesn't do anything really. Our piracy numbers aren't higher than the U.S. or anything, so I don't see why anyone would think it encourages piracy.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:00pm
    
    Re: Re:
    What is the opposite of discouraging piracy? Null or encouragement. If you tax the people, you create a right, a feeling of having paid the tax, so they can do what they like. Personal file trading with impunity, no nasty fair use requirements, just give it away to anyone and everyone. No issues, everyone paid the tax.
    
    It certainly isn't doing anything to lower piracy, is it? Well, possibly to re-classify file trading as not being piracy, because it's has been taxed into legal status.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The eejit (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:22pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No, null is neutral. neither for nor against.
      
      And that's a very valid point - if one taxes an illegalm act, does it not, therefore, become legal? OR is that just governmental doublespeak?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - crade (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:46pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        According to the government, the levy is to allow us the priviledge of format shifting and making mix tapes. It's really stupid but it has nothing whatsoever to do with piracy or getting music without paying.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:39pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You don't seem to know how the levy works. It doesn't work like that. There is no free trading with impunity. In fact giving a copy to anyone is expressly forbidden and reinforced again in the part that discusses the levy.
      
      I agree it isn't doing anything to lower piracy, as I said, it is basically useless, but thats ok, we are doing fine on that front. The DMCA, ridiculous lawsuits, 3 strikes and all that other crap isn't doing anything to lower piracy either.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - crade (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:43pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Also, no one is being taxed. You only pay into the levy by choice if you buy those retarded music CD's. No one buys those, they cost more than the regular blank CDs.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - crade (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 3:29pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Because this annoys me so much, here is the part of the copyright act that discusses limitations to the private copying exception (whole thing here http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showtdm/cs/C-42/ )
        Notice both distributing in any way for trade and communicating to the public not allowed.
        :
        
        (2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act
        described in that subsection is done for the purpose
        of doing any of the following in relation to
        any of the things referred to in paragraphs
        (1)(a) to (c):
        (a) selling or renting out, or by way of trade
        exposing or offering for sale or rental;
        (b) distributing, whether or not for the purpose
        of trade;
        (c) communicating to the public by telecommunication;
        or
        (d) performing, or causing to be performed,
        in public.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcus Carab (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:45am
  
  Re:
  Someone's been reading the Special 301 Report...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:49am
  
  Re:
  [Citation Needed]
  
  As always.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]