Voltage Pictures Thinks Canada's New Copyright Law Opens The Door For More Trolling
from the oh-canada dept
You may recall Voltage Pictures not because it once made a movie that won the Oscar for Best Picture (Hurt Locker), but because it was basically the first Hollywood studio to embrace copyright trolling. This is the company whose boss, Nicolas Chartier, once said that anyone who criticizes his company for copyright trolling is a moron and a thief (and that was in response to a rather friendly and polite email to Chartier suggesting that copyright trolling might hurt the company's reputation in the long run). While some of its earlier efforts to sue thousands of people at once (in once case it sued nearly 25,000 people in one shot) have run into difficulties, Voltage just won't quit. A quick check of the records shows that it's still been filing new lawsuits in the US (among smaller groups) and trying to make the case for proper joinder by using the "swarm" theory: that if all the IP addresses are a part of the same swarm, they're all connected in the legal issue (of course, they miss the fact that this would likely also mean that the total sum that could be collected would be split among all defendants).And, now, it appears, they've decided to try the same scheme up north. We had just noted that with Canada's new copyright law in place, it appeared that the copyright trolls were getting ready to pounce -- and that's now been confirmed. ISP TekSavvy initially released a blog post noting that Voltage Pictures was demanding a ton of information on many of its users. So far, the company is resisting, while notifying its users. It also noted that Voltage's strategy here is an odd one:
We are frankly puzzled by the approach that Voltage has taken. It seems contrary to the government’s intent with copyright reform, which was to discourage file sharing lawsuits against individuals, while still protecting copyright holders’ rights. The manner and the timing of this action also seems unusual given that the government recently created a roadmap for addressing file sharing and copyright infringement within its legislation. Its starting point is a notification system to subscribers to discourage infringement without immediate threats of lawsuits or disclosure of their personal information. That system is not yet finalized though. In light of these factors, Voltage’s actions seem odd to us.The move by Voltage has a number of people confused. One of the really good features of Canada's new copyright laws is a cap on how much someone would have to pay at $5,000. That takes away a troll's ability to demand huge sums, while also limiting its ability to wave a big stick about them being liable for $150,000 in possible statutory awards (as they do in the US). Besides, as Teksavvy notes, the Canadian government was already worried about trolling when it passed the new law.
It appears to us that a notice period is essential, especially in cases where large privacy disclosures may be involved. Without this notice, a customer could be the subject of a lawsuit and not even know about it. Surely this is in part why the government is seeking to enact such notice provisions in the policy.
At this point there are many unanswered questions. How does Voltage intend to proceed? How will the courts rule if customers should retain legal counsel? Under what conditions might the court order the disclosure of customer information? If Voltage is successful, how many more notices will Canadian ISPs receive? Is there a limit to what the court will allow?
In the end, it's unclear if Voltage is so wedded to the idea of copyright trolling that it simply doesn't understand what's going on in Canada. Either way, it makes one thing clear: I will now go out of my way to never watch a movie from Voltage. Who would support a company that sues its fans?
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 trolling
Companies: teksavvy, voltage pictures
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I won't ever watch or think of watching anything that comes from lowlife Voltage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And the Oscar goes to... WHAT?
http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20311937_20572218_21123151,00.html
Might be one of the lowest grossing best-picture winners ever.
It is...
http://www.cnbc.com/id/41762460/page/16
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
There are worse best picture winners.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Ditto for:
Tucker & Dale vs Evil
The Whistleblower (at least not owned by voltage)
True Justice: Brotherhood
The Third Act or The Magic of Belle Isle
Breathless (at least not owned by voltage)
Peace Love & Misunderstanding
Conviction (at least not owned by voltage)
The Good Doctor (at least not owned by voltage)
Faces in the Crowd (at least not owned by voltage)
Rosewood Lane
Puncture - nope
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/Home
Doesn't look like they have taken the time to register their copyrights in Canada.
I recommend telling them to fuck off if the Judge doesn't do so on Monday.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Great way to make fans indeed...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"I hope your family and your kids end up in jail one day for stealing so maybe they can be taught the difference. Until then, keep being stupid, you're doing that very well. And please do not download, rent, or pay for my movies, I actually like smart and more important HONEST people to watch my films."
That is the golden standard for how not to treat your fans. I honestly have never seen a better example of someone raging in such an uninformed and selfdestructive manner. Tragicomical is what it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
wow! he *must* have been coked-up to go off like that...
inspired me to write an email to the douche, *and* possibly download -pirate style!- just for the lulz...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is a matter of the greatest regret
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actual court cases aren't where copyright-troll companies like this get their profits from, and in fact they tend to try their absolute best to avoid actually going to court if they can at all manage it. Instead they follow a simple three(and a half) step program:
Step 1: Get court to order ISP's to hand over names and addresses of as many people as they think they can get away with.
Step 2: Send out extortion letters to all the people that were on the list they just got, 'offering' the target a small(couple hundred or couple thousand) 'settlement' fee, to avoid (potentially) being dragged to court, which will cost more.
Step 2.5: If target either a) lawyers up, or b) doesn't respond, ignore them and move on to the next target.
Going to court costs the one sending out the letters money, and would require them to show their 'proof', which to date has almost always been something that a competent computer expert could tear to pieces rather quickly, potentially hurting their ability to pull the same scam later on, hence going to court to actually prosecute someone is the last thing they want.
Step 3: Profit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
When can we make extortion/harassment letters/email illegal so if a person feels threatened they can use this as a evidence to convey that their personal lives are at stake?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Masnick channels his inner Gorehound (without the random capitalized words). Two peas in a pod.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, if the defendant doesn't respond then the judge will rule in favor of the Troll by default judgement. So if anyone get's a letter from a Troll, you're best option is to consult a lawyer and tell your lawyer to send the judge a "motion to squash" the lawsuit. That usually works if live outside the jurisdiction of the court where the Troll filed the lawsuit at.
So if a letter is addressed to your house (not an email, and actual letter in you mailbox), ignoring it is the worst thing you can do, because the judge is rule in the Troll's favor by default, and probably accept the Troll's recommendation for a maximum fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A clarification:
Ignoring an actual lawsuit against you would be insanely stupid, and for exactly the reason you mention.
And unless the justice system is even more screwed up than I already believe it to be, they cannot go straight from a 'we might sue you' letter to 'we are suing you' without also notifying their target about the change from potential lawsuit, to actual lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Few Points...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have no objection to copyright trolling, but I don't like injustice.
The challenge here would be for the plaintiff (Voltage Pictures) to prove that all those who downloaded, say, "The Hurt Locker" from a torrent site did not have fair use claims on the material... that is, Voltage would have to prove that all those they are suing do NOT own a DVD version of "The Hurt Locker" and prove that the downloading of the "Hurt Locker" torrent is stealing, not just a convenience for the downloader so they don't have to do all that Ripping and converting themselves.
This makes the plaintiff's case weak, because all the defendants would have to do is rush out and buy a used copy of The Hurt Locker on DVD for $3 before the sheriff comes knocking on their front door with a warrant to search their home to see if they own the material they have on their computer.
Also, there should be no penalty to HOSTING a torrent... the penalty should SOLELY be on the person downloading, if they have downloaded and can't prove that they own a copy of the physical media which entitles them to a fair use claim.
Let's be frank: most people who download torrents of copyrighted work do NOT have a fair use claim. They just do so to avoid having to pay the price of buying the DVD or CD or whatever... but it's not justice to just sue EVERYBODY who ever downloaded a torrent in an "innocent 'til proven guilty" society like ours. PROVE that the downloader does not have a fair-use claim, and do NOT persecute those who make files available, because they are not FORCING the content on the downloaders: the downloader is to blame for downloading material to which they don't have a fair-use claim, and the plaintiff MUST prove that the downloader does NOT have a fair-use claim before any damages can be claimed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I have no objection to copyright trolling, but I don't like injustice.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121212/08131021361/voltage-pictures-thinks-canad as-new-copyright-law-opens-door-more-trolling.shtml#c522
Not very good management happening here.
"Also, there should be no penalty to HOSTING a torrent... the penalty should SOLELY be on the person downloading..."
Yes, lets keep the supply in place and keep punishing those who dare to use it.
An aj recruit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Voltage movies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Court Documents Issued To Teksavvy
http://www.teksavvy.com/en/why-teksavvy/in-the-news/teksavvy-customer-notices/legal-documents-fo r-request-for-customer-information
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
voltage trolling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]