Canadian Telcos Lose Their Goddamn Minds Over TVAddons
from the wtf? dept
For years, we've expressed general bewilderment at the practice in British Commonwealth countries to effectively allow private search warrants, which are given to non-government private parties, engaged in civil infringement cases, to effectively break down other people's doors and dig through their stuff. We've discussed such "Anton Piller" orders in Australia and the UK. And, apparently they apply in Canada too.
And that leads us to the craziest damn story you'll ever read about a bunch of private companies losing their freaking minds over something they believe is infringing. In this case, it's the site TVAddons, which is a site that links to various Kodi software add-ons. Kodi, if you're unaware, is open source home theater software (it was originally the Xbox Media Center, XBMC, but has expanded since then). It's quite popular and an easy way to use a device with Kodi to turn your TV into a smart TV. There are tons of perfectly legitimate and non-infringing uses for Kodi, and a variety of sources of "Kodi boxes" that allow people to make use of the features and to install a variety of useful apps -- such as adding YouTube or Netflix to your TV. Admittedly, there are some add-ons that allow users to access infringing content, though even those add-ons are just really linking to content stored openly and available online.
Still, in the last few years, the entertainment industry has completely lost its shit about Kodi boxes and the ability to use them to infringe. And more than a few sites involved in the space have been targeted. Recently, Dish Network sued TVAddons, a site that aggregates a bunch of Kodi add-ons. However, around the same time, it appears that up in Canada, all the big TV providers went absolutely insane. Bell Canada, TVA, Videotron and Rogers all not only sued TVAddons, but got an Anton Piller order allowing those companies (not police) to raid the home of the guy behind TVAddons, Adam Lackman. For fairly obvious reasons, the process of getting an Anton Piller order is one-sided. There is no adversarial process, because the other side isn't alerted beforehand that someone's trying to get an order allowing them to conduct a surprise raid to grab evidence.
The story of what happened next, first chronicled by Torrentfreak and the CBC is absolutely astounding.
And while a court eventually realized that these companies massively abused the Anton Piller process to effectively interrogate, intimidate, and hold Lackman hostage without legal representation, it came way too late -- and after they'd walked off with a bunch of his stuff, including his domains and his social media and email accounts and passwords. The story is shocking in its overreach. And, let's be clear here: the vast majority of the content on TVAddons is perfectly legal. As the court eventually pointed out, out of 1,500 add-ons, only 22 were found to be infringing. This was not a den of piracy. So keep that in mind as you read what happened. From Torrentfreak:
On June 12, the order was executed and Lackman’s premises were searched for more than 16 hours. For nine hours he was interrogated and effectively denied his right to remain silent since non-cooperation with an Anton Piller order amounts to contempt of court. The Court’s stated aim of not intimidating Lackman failed.
The TVAddons operator informs TorrentFreak that he heard a disturbance in the hallway outside and spotted several men hiding on the other side of the door. Fearing for his life, Lackman called the police and when they arrived he opened the door. At this point, the police were told by those in attendance to leave, despite Lackman’s protests.
Once inside, Lackman was told he had an hour to find a lawyer, but couldn’t use any electronic device to get one. Throughout the entire day, Lackman says he was reminded by the plaintiffs’ lawyer that he could be held in contempt of court and jailed, even though he was always cooperating.
“I had to sit there and not leave their sight. I was denied access to medication,” Lackman told TorrentFreak. “I had a doctor’s appointment I was forced to miss. I wasn’t even allowed to call and cancel.”
In papers later filed with the court by Lackman’s team, the Anton Piller order was described as a “bombe atomique” since TVAddons had never been served with so much as a copyright takedown notice in advance of this action.
I spoke with one of Lackman's lawyers, who told me that Lackman called while this search was happening, only to have the plaintiff's lawyers demand that he hang up and not talk to his lawyer. That's fucked up. Remember, this is not law enforcement. This is not a criminal case. These are private companies ransacking a guy's house and demanding he give up everything and denying him access to his lawyer. They also demanded Lackman give them information on a variety of other people -- and again threatened him with contempt if he didn't comply.
The intent behind Anton Piller cases is to prevent the destruction of evidence. In the US, we seem to deal with this in a more civilized manner -- in which defendants in cases may be alerted to preserve evidence, and failure to do so can lead to significant sanctions (and bad inferences) for "spoliation of evidence." Canada might want to think about adopting something similar.
Eventually, the court realized what a mess this was, vacating the earlier injunction and demanding that the companies return everything that they took. The court realized (again, too late) that the TV companies were using the Anton Piller order not for preservation of evidence, as is required, but for outright interrogation and discovery.
I find the most egregious part of the questioning to be in the independent solicitor’s affidavit, wherein he deposes that counsel for the Plaintiffs ‘provided Defendant Lackman with some names’ of other people who might be operating similar websites. It appears the Defendant was required to associate that list of 30 names with names, addresses and other data about individuals that might have some knowledge or relationship to those names. The list and the responses of the Defendant are found on three complete pages in the exhibits of the independent solicitor’s affidavit. I conclude that those questions, posed by Plaintiff’s counsel, were solely in furtherance of their investigation and constituted a hunt for further evidence, as opposed to the preservation of then existing evidence.
Oh, and also to destroy TVAddons before any actual legal process.
To the Plaintiffs, it mattered not that, by their own estimate, just over 1% of the Add-ons developed by the Defendant were allegedly used to infringe copyright. I therefore conclude that the purpose of the Anton Pillar Order under review was only partly designed to preserve evidence that might be destroyed or that could disappear. I am of the view that its true purpose was to destroy the livelihood of the Defendant, deny him the financial resources to finance a defence to the claim made against him, and to provide an opportunity for discovery of the Defendant in circumstances where none of the procedural safeguards of our civil justice system could be engaged.
Well, no shit. Torrentfreak shows a transcript of the lawyer for the TV companies just flat out admitting that the strategy was to "neutralize" everything.
Justice: And on the next page, paragraph 5, so the experts would deactivate the TV Add-ons domains and sub-domains, so you really want to neutralize the Defendant's operations?
Lawyer for the Plaintiffs: Yeah, completely.
Justice: Completely...
Lawyer for the Plaintiffs: Yeah.
Justice: So it's more than saying you're enjoined of not operating or communicating, you really want to neutralize the guy.
Lawyer for the Plaintiffs: Yeah, completely, that's for sure. Yeah. We use his passwords, we shut down everything, we change the password and we change everything and it cannot be reactivated by him or someone else. That's the goal.
And that's what happened... until the court reversed the order and demanded they give everything back. But... in the meantime, how the hell is that allowed? The raid happened back on June 12th, and Lackman couldn't even talk about it until last week.
Incredibly, after getting slammed by this judge on June 29th, the TV companies appealed and asked to be able to keep all the access to Lackman's stuff. And that's where things are right now. The TV companies get to keep everything and Lackman has nothing... at least until there's a ruling on the appeal, and there won't even be a hearing on that for a few months. Lackman has set up a crowdfunding campaign in the meantime.
This entire story is shocking, but fits within a rather unfortunate theme that we see all too frequently around copyright. Legacy companies assume the absolute worst -- and assume that because there's some infringement somewhere everything must be wiped out and that it's blindingly obvious that they should be allowed to go in and basically destroy everything. It's the same sort of attitude that happened with the ridiculous "raid" on Kim Dotcom's mansion five years ago -- where Hollywood folks had spent so many years hyping up how Dotcom was a Hollywood-style evil villain that, clearly, they needed to bring in the FBI and special forces to raid his house with heavy weaponry and grab everything.
Over and over again, they seem to think that a little copyright infringement happening somewhere means they should now be free to destroy everything. It's quite incredible.
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: adam lackman, addons, anton piller, canada, copyright, interrogation, kodi, piracy
Companies: bell canada, rogers, tva, tvaddons, videotron
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
And they want people to respect copyright... Yeah.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
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: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Sir, I saw people hiding behind my door so I grabbed my rifle. When they kicked in the door I opened fire to protect my life and property."
"Ok, sounds pretty clear, your free to go"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shame
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shame
At least the judge stood up for the little guy, how often does that happen in the USA or anywhere else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Shame
Oh really? And how many of the "big guys" who did this to this "little guy" did the judge send to prison?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
That ain't justice, my little telco apologist friend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Shame
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That comment
Tresspassing
Kidnapping
Theft
and perhaps extortion for the way he was interrogated and threatened with contempt of court if he didn't cooperate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They're just following the precedent we set in the US with the DMCA, of allowing private law enforcement actions when it comes to accusations of copyright infringement. This follows directly from that.
Now you understand why I've been saying for years that the DMCA needs to be repealed...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just try to imagine how this would have played out with the little guy suing the big guy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Here in the US, the Corps control the government. In the Commonwealth, the Corps ARE the government."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yes, it is incredible but you can thank the endless bribery and corruption of the government, politicians, courts, judges and law enforcement/law makers IN THE USA for all this shit, allowing Hollywood and the entertainment industries in general to basically rule the planet, including the Internet! until someone grows a pair and stands up to these ass holes, nothing will change, with the industries thinking and being allowed to use Gestapo tactics whenever and wherever they see fit! this all goes back to the days of the video recorder and MP3 player, where the universe was going to collapse because the industries weren't able to stop people from viewing programs and listening to music when they wanted! look how totally fucked up things are now, all thanks to the USA government and tactics that are, really, worse than anything that has ever been fought against in the many wars we've had over the centuries!! fucking ridiculous!! allowing an industry that pays no taxes, doesn't pay it's own artists, gives towns a pittance for filming there but ruining everything that that's touched, then complains it wants paying for the privilege!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It more a case that any hint of copyright infringement gives them an excuse to destroy a legal competitor. Piracy is not the real problem, but rather the increasing number of self publishers, and the technology that makes finding and viewing that content easy. If somebody is watching self published content, they are no longer eyeballs to be counted for the purposes of gaining advertising revenue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I agree, Piracy, like a black market, is a symptom of a system that is not working. Something that is in demand is not being properly vented, in this case, entertainment. Between high costs and bloated legacy channels, and the general asshole attitude of the gatekeepers like this entire article points out. People are looking for... alternative methods of consuming entertainment and culture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Of the parties involved here, don't the telcos most closely resemble pirates? After all, they broke into his property, held him hostage, and stole his stuff. The victim had only compiled a list of software.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Castle Doctorine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Castle Doctorine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Castle Doctorine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Castle Doctorine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Castle Doctorine
No, Lackman called the police, and the copyright gang just followed them in, and told the police to leave. And apparently, the police just take orders from them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Castle Doctorine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Castle Doctorine
The copyright gang was accompanied by a bailiff. An officer of the court told the officers that they weren't needed and could leave.
Since this is a civil action, in Montreal, it's also worth mentioning that the rules may be different.
Quebec's legal system - for civil matters - is based on French-heritage civil law. As opposed to British common law for the rest of Canada and for all of the US except for Louisiana. Anton Piller orders exist in the rest of Canada, but the rules may be different.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Express.co.uk: Kodi stream add-on site TVAddons is BACK, but here's why you should avoid it at all costs
They describe the site as an infamous and notorious piracy site AND they tell everyone that it's now a honeypot that could get you in trouble too.
So while the cable company's actions to destroy this guy's business were illegal... mission accomplished.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a suspect.'' -- Attorney General Edwin Meese (1985)
It seems the Golden Age began with the Regan Administration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Oh great! They invade his home, steal all of his stuff, hold him incommunicado for hours while interrogating him, and threaten him with anything they can come up with...but at least he might be able to get some of them censured by their professional organization. They might even, le gasp, have to transfer to supporting legal roles that don't involve actually going into court.
Yes, the possibility of a job title change and maybe a pay cut for some of the people involved is clearly sufficient. Why, maybe we could even give them a rap on the knuckles with a wooden ruler.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why didn't he just say no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why didn't he just say no?
Maybe he wasn't ready to die. Court orders can be enforced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How many...
of these orders have been issued to people to go raid telcos and confiscate their equipment and records looking for "evidence" to support possible legal actions? Or is Canada another of those places like the US with different laws for different people?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How many...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anton PIller
But the Order sought in this case is not a search warrant. It does not authorise the Plaintiffs' Solicitors or anyone else to enter the Defendant's premises against his will. It does not authorise the breaking down of any doors, nor the slipping in by a back door, nor getting in by an open door or window. It only authorises entry and inspection by the permission of the Defendants. The Plaintiff must get the Defendant's permission. But it does do this: It brings pressure on the Defendants to give permission. It does more. It actually orders him to give permission—with, I suppose, the result that if he does not give permission, he is guilty of contempt of Court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Anton PIller
Which is punishable by imprisonment by force in the amount necessary. So, it clearly can result in the use of force against a person, but only if they resist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Age old method of doing thing
"We had to burn the village to the ground to save it"
If they get their way they will eventually burn themselves to the ground along with all of us, in their quest to protect their money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks for the story, Mike.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technology development
I have mixed feelings about this. Both sides are evil in this story. If the guy has trouble filtering illegal addons away from his site, maybe he's running larger site than what he can handle. Entertainment industry has every right to go after the people who distribute the tools that are allowing piracy to prosper. If pirates are using some tools to do the piracy, the tool authors and distributors are in trouble. One person operation collecting thousands of addon's probably has problems handling legality of all the content they're posting online.
On the other hand, entertainment industry handled this case commpletely wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Technology development
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Technology development
If some technology is built for the sole purpose of infringing copyrights, then the technology itself is illegal. Even situations where there are valid uses of the tech, but most of the users are using it for illegal purposes, then the technology itself is dubious.
People who build technology need to be aware of the possible uses of his technology and actively prevent uses that can lead to the technology being used by pirates or other criminal groups.
People who distribute technology, need to ensure that the products are not used for illegal purposes (by anyone in the world).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Congrats, you just outlawed selling automobiles that go above the speed limit or crash or can be driven by drunks or by distracted drivers.
Maybe, just maybe, we're better off when individuals take responsibility for how they use tools, rather than blaming the tools.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
There would be no incentive for automobile manufacturers to improve safety of the cars, unless this rule was actually used.
Why do you think it's worth the effort to spend billions improving car safety, if govt didn't force manufacturers to do it. It wouldn't just make any economics sense for the manufacturers at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
"Why do you think it's worth the effort to spend billions improving car safety, if govt didn't force manufacturers to do it. It wouldn't just make any economics sense for the manufacturers at all."
This is patently false. In Europe we have a thing called an NCAP rating for cars. Manufacturers want as high a rating as possible because safety ratings, just like fuel consumption, build quality, performance, eco-ratings etc. are important to people. My Toyota has a 5, the highest rating. It's bristling with airbags, crumple zones, a frangible steering column and so on. No government compelled Toyota to build to this standard. More than anything else, it's a consumer-led market force.
https://www.euroncap.com/en
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
I'm sensing a trend...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Get hit by a Hummer and see how safe you are then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Since this content is readily available why wasnt microsoft or google raided. The same content can be found with their search engines and browsers I assume. For that matter why not the players that play the content? Or maybe the operating systems that allow all the players to play the content?. And lastly since all these are available on the internet, why not shut the entire internet down also? Its that technology that actually enables this to go on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Who says they were not raided? They might want to keep it secret and not post it to internet community to digest.
> The same content can be found with their search engines and browsers I assume.
Browser choice is interesting. There are people in the world who don't like using browsers because of their position on things like copy-paste in view-source dialog, which allows copyright infringement of all javascript source code. The programmers who spent their life studying programming languages gets their work stolen by browser's view-source dialog.
Note that _allowing_ the illegal operation is the bad thing. Making it easy enough that half the people on the planet is doing copyright infringement accidentally is pretty much criminal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Oh yeah, it's not that your assertion was dumb, it's that everyone's in on the conspiracy!
"There are people in the world who don't like using browsers"
They're free not to access the web, other parts of the internet and other forms of communication are available.
"view-source dialog, which allows copyright infringement of all javascript source code"
They shouldn't be putting their code out in public, then. Apart from the fact that they will have been choosing not to use one of the many ways to obfuscate such code, it's amazingly stupid for them to be that concerned with secrecy when they choose a platform where everything by nature is publicly visible. Why have they chosen to work in a non-compiled public form of coding if they're that paranoid about their code being seen?
It's also rather hypocritical, seeing as most of them will be using at the very least an open source browser to access other sites, if not depend on open source web servers, open protocols, etc to have their work visible in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Oh please. If they had the corp shills would be bragging about it all over the internet. Also they werent named in it.
"
Browser choice is interesting. There are people in the world who don't like using browsers because of their position on things like copy-paste in view-source dialog, which allows copyright infringement of all javascript source code. The programmers who spent their life studying programming languages gets their work stolen by browser's view-source dialog."
Stolen? Really? viewing java script is not stealing nor infringing. Get real.
"
Note that _allowing_ the illegal operation is the bad thing. Making it easy enough that half the people on the planet is doing copyright infringement accidentally is pretty much criminal."
Uhmm just to let you know. People make laws not the corporations. If half the people are doing it then thats almost a majority. I dont know about you, but where i live the majority is supposed to rule. Also if half the people are doing it then there is something wrong with the corp business models. businesses come and busnisses go. thats the way of things. they shouldnt forcing people to support their dreamed up monopolies in order for them to stay in business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
It's just that _everyone_ who ever wrote any javascript and someone on the internet copied those javascript pieces from view source dialog, can sue both the browser makers for providing the tools to do it, and the copier for copyright infringment. The point here is that the established tools that everyone is using, are NOT immune to problems in copyright infringment analysis.
While they might be using _current_ best practises, when better approaches appear, the established players will want to control the market, but they will be just sued for stuff like view-source dialog in browsers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Now as for javascript, its just like software code. There are many ways code can be written. But with the way code works, the way code is optimized, and styles and standards are taught, the possibilities of 2 or more people writing the exact same, or similar, code are very high. especially if the the same or similar output or idea, is expected The tools to read code are there to teach, inspect, and for troubleshooting issues with the code. Proving someone used them to do a copy/paste is kinda hard to prove given the facts about how it all works. This makes "copyright" of software problematic at best and can lead to many false claims of infringement. Or abuses by copyright trolls to make money off of other peoples works by suing them and putting them "out of business"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Lots of things "allow" infringement. The fool proof only way to eliminate all human infringement is to eliminate all humans - sounds a bit foolish doesn't it?
In your mind, what exactly constitutes infringement?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
It doesn't have to be this way. Technology can be built in such way that it doesn't allow illegal copyright infringement to happen at all. This way humans don't always need to track manually whether you're doing copyright infringement under 200k dollars fine inside their head. Technology could make it completely impossible to do, which would save tons of manual work by users and (even) authors who build on top of other people's work.
Temporary solution for this was called "free software", i.e. give permission to do the operations that are desirable. But the real solution is to _prevent_ the operations that are actually illegal, via technological locks, i.e. DRM scemes and encryption etc. It just need to be accurate enough that it does not prevent interesting use cases. And this accuracy is what is currently missing in our technologies - you either need to prevent useful operations, or you need to allow copyright infringement. But that's only technical problem: how to make your infringement tests accurate enough.
Why should people be scared of crossing some invisible copyright infringement lines, if technology can make following copyright completely automatic?
Of course, if would be sad, if your business model is based on copyright infringment. Once the proper DRM tech is availble, everyone will notice how badly our old technologies are working, and how the big (copyright) problem was caused by the deficiencies of our technologies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
That cannot be done perfectly, and requires that you do not have any control over the devices used to display copyrighted content. It would also require that devices that can record are also under the same control, lest you switch them on when any copyrighted material is being played or displayed anywhere near them.
What you are suggestion leads to most people having less rights than serfs, who while tied to to the land, also could not be thrown of of the land. Copyright maximalism leads towards one or two big corporations owning almost all of the tools in you life, and able to turn them off whenever the need you to spend money on a replacement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Well, when someone is spending tons of work to create some product, and then it's being distributed around the world without compensation to the author. Every author has limited reach in the world, and if users don't find the authorised entity, then compensation does not flow to the right place. Middleman is taking the money, and it does not reach the correct author. Reachability analysis is essential to copyright infringement analysis.
How to detect copyright infringement: Count the amount of effort that went into the product. Put minimum wage to it. If the price you paid was _smaller_ than the effort that was spent to create it -- you have workers working for no payment. For example Free Software/youtube/wikipedia went to this trap that they have tons of unpaid slaves working for them. Analysis of compensation is essential to infringement determination.
Everything where the money goes to the middleman who didn't deserve the money, constitutes copyright infringment. There's tons of companies that are selling "hot air", i.e. products that they didn't create themselves. IT doesn't have to be _because of copying_ the product, but for example if the company forgets to pay the salary for the author, then the middleman is taking the money, and it does not reach the right author.
Copyright law assumes that authors can handle their own money problems. This might be too optimistic view. Authors are still being ripped off by middleman who just takes the money and runs, without passing share of it to the people who spend the time..
Counting spent time and spent effort is essential to proper infringement analysis. If you spent the time, you should have compensation. When this is not being followed to the letter, then there's infringement. All the current technologies fall into this trap, including youtube, wikipedia, free software, social media platforms, etc... Pretty much all internet technologies are all completely broken.
These broken internet platforms are only accepted beacuse we don't have anything better. Everyone of us can help making it better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Products can be used for legal or illegal purposes, granted, but I can't leave a legally owned loaded gun sitting out on my front lawn unattended and not expect to be held responsible if a kid comes along, picks it up and shoots themselves, can I? I mean, that dead 6 year old should take some personal responsibility for his actions, right?
If some of those apps were only used for illegal purposes, then maybe there is a bit of responsibility of the guy that was hosting it. Amazon sells quite a few products, pretty sure they take down ones that are 100% illegal.
Of course, I have no idea what Kodi software does outside of reading this article, but what was written about in this article makes me laugh. Forget being in Texas and shooting them, just let your dog loose on them. If you can't legally own a gun, you can still own a Doberman in Canada, right? "But your honor, I complied with your order, but my dog can't read so he bit those jerks" Of course, after biting one of their lawyers, the dog would probably have to go get additional shots, thus costing you even more money and hassle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Nice straw man... so in the above case not only you need to take ownership, but the store you bought the gun from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
You're welcome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Technology development
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Technology development
If Sony couldn't filter illegal recordings away from their VCR's, then maybe they were into more than they could handle, eh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Technology development
Yup. If I remember right, vcr manufacturers were in fact sued for this problem. During the years, there has always been manufacturers who do not care about following the rules - and they just hope noone would notice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Maybe you should go read Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. to remind yourself how that turned out for you guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
If these guys were actually sued, it means someone in the world was thinking the technology is illegal. This sounds like they ought to fix the problem in their tech. Sadly we're still waiting for the fix, but guess it means they didn't care about the position of the other side of the case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
Erm, someone thinks that EVERY technology has illegal purposes. Name the tech, someone complains about it having illegal or immoral uses.
Sorry, sometimes it's not the technology at fault.
"Sadly we're still waiting for the fix, but guess it means they didn't care about the position of the other side of the case."
In the case of the VCR, "the position of the other side of the case" was proven utterly baseless, and the movie industry built a highly lucrative and profitable VHS rental industry, closely followed by an equally successful VHS sales industry, once they stopped suing and whining and started innovating. So lucrative, in fact, that it was to protect this business that they started trying to cripple DVDs, attack streaming/download distribution and so forth. Until they learned how to make money from those, of course.
Sometimes, the real problem is the person doing the complaining.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
You're still waiting for Sony to "fix" VCR's? Wow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development
The lesson to take from VHS is obviously that if you file lawsuits, the problem will eventually get solved.
Yep, that's definitely the lesson here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seriously, take the time while they are scrambling to get a warrant to change all your passwords, back up all your data to the cloud, and get stinking, puking drunk so they can't question you.
Optionally, it might help to sit there "cleaning" your firearms while they try to intimidate you as well - if you decide to skip the drinking part above, that is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seems to me that the right decision is to refuse permission, keep the door locked and take the contempt of court charge - that way they have to come back WITH the police (have your lawyer present) and you get to keep all your stuff.
That's one of the messed up parts of the story, the police were there, and were the reason he opened the door, it's just they were told to leave.
'Fearing for his life, Lackman called the police and when they arrived he opened the door. At this point, the police were told by those in attendance to leave, despite Lackman’s protests.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Those people need to be careful in states like FL and TX
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When you're young, copyright is a restriction on what you can do. When you get older, and need to actually create yourself all the products that you consume, copyright becomes something useful. It prevents you from burning out from constant market demands of more and more products. The work amount limits only work because large number of people follow copyright limitations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Exactly. The whole world should make do with just a few million spatulas, otherwise all of the poor spatula makers will burn out from the constant market demands of more and more products. In fact, every spatula maker should only have to create one spatula, then charge people for using it for the rest of his natural life (plus 70....100...150....300...1000 years). Otherwise he'll burn out from the market demand for spatulas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Fixed for reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Ummmm - what?
"It prevents you from burning out from constant market demands"
What market and what are they demanding?
Not sure wth you are talking about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It never did. Abolish copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Playing the legal system like a fine instrument
That those involved aren't facing serious penalties, and are in fact still arguing that they did nothing wrong shows how screwed up the law is and how pathetic the judges involved are being.
The man was essentially imprisoned in his own home, denied access to a lawyer while threatened with contempt charges if he didn't 'cooperate', when he called for the police the police were sent away after they got him to open the door, they flat out admit that the purpose was to destroy his business rather than 'preserve evidence'... this should be a trivial case to get through, and the judge who originally approved their little raid should be furious to have been used so blatantly, but I guess in Canada, as in the US, 'Everything goes so long as you claim it's copyright related'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If that happened at my place...
But if the police come and decide there isn't a problem, I guess I could take their word for it and let them in.
But, preventing me from calling a lawyer, or a doctor, and trying to keep me from any electronic communication at all? Ransacking my house and walking away with my stuff, demanding my passwords and email accounts and everything? Making 'legal' threats against me unless I stay put in one place and answer all their questions?
I would officially consider it a home invasion and...honestly? I'd probably grab a steak knife from the kitchen and use it to keep them away from me while I call the police back.
...Although, I probably wouldn't have let them in in the first place. If I saw a bunch of people at my front door, I'd tell them they're at the wrong place for the surprise party. And if they insisted they had a court order (which being ex parte, I probably wouldn't have known about beforehand), I'd call bullshit and tell them to go away or at least wait until I verify it.
Would that make me an overall reasonable person?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If that happened at my place...
Very reasonable and sensible of you. I'd also call their bluff. I'd want to go down the contempt of court route with the hope/intention of discussing this with the idiot judge who ordered it. The people knocking at the door couldn't use actual force against me, nor could they force entry. They couldn't arrest me. They could ask the police to make an arrest and that could go either way. If they police did arrest me I'd be locking my door behind me. The police wouldn't have entry to my house unless they secured their own warrant to enter.
So if things went that far, if the police did arrest me, at least I'd be talking to my lawyer. Between us we'd be hoping that someone senior in either law enforcement or the courts would see sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: If that happened at my place...
That would not have worked, given that a bailiff was already present with court order allowing him and the cable company thugs to enter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sweetest Revenge?
The Judge recognises and confirms with the Corps lawyers that the objective was to destroy his livelihood, not actually execute the Anton Pillar order and preserve evidence.
so,
The Judge should order not just the return of the all assets and properties, but a lifetime annual stipend to replace the livelihood they destroyed. Take it from the Lawyers insurance, then the Judge should refer them to the Bar to have them disbarred for conspiracy to pervert the law, clearly admitted in evidence in Court.
They need to be slapped senseless for abuse of the Law in ways that make others refuse to participate in such egregious perversions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Saying they lost their minds actually strikes me as being far too kind after this stunt. They invaded the guy's house, forced him to answer questions and refused to allow him to contact a lawyer, stole a bunch of his stuff, admitted in court that their goal was to shut him down rather than 'preserve evidence'...
'Not-so-momentary insanity' is the nice explanation for their actions, with other possible explanations being far less flattering.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another non-Techdirt-approved update for ya! -- "TVAddons Suffers Big Setback as Court Completely Overturns Earlier Ruling"
...
https://torrentfreak.com/tvaddons-suffers-big-setback-as-court-completely-overturns-earlie r-ruling-180221/
As I've stated before, if updates aren't in Techdirt's favor, then you never hear about it again.
You pirates are LOSING.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Another non-Techdirt-approved update for ya! -- "TVAddons Suffers Big Setback as Court Completely Overturns Earlier Ruling"
Wait, aren't you the drooling basketcase who has been attacking TD for weeks because they aren't publishing breaking news and can take several days to write up a reasoned article? Now you're saying that as they haven't written a story that's way less than 24 hours old, they never will? Make up your mind!
Intelligence and logic are still strangers in your home, it seems.
"You pirates are LOSING."
Still namecalling and lying about the audience you hang with, huh?
The only interesting thing about your comment is that you used Torrent Freak as your source. Are you the idiot who always used to attack Mike as being a pirate for referencing articles on that site, or was that another patient in your ward?
Oh, and don't get too smug about this warning. Go back in the TD archives - there you will see comments from an obsessed anonymous lunatic (perhaps even you) claiming the same thing about every legal case since well before the sites in question here existed.
As ever, if only you were as intent on intelligent debate and discussing the solutions to piracy that actually work, as you are on lying and supporting methods with always backfire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]