Cannucks At The Mercy Of The RIAA? I don't think so.

Factual Questions
1

I’m not sure if this question HAS a factual answer, so it may need to be moved to great debates. However, I’m curious to get other people’s opinions on whether the RIAA will be able to obtain subpoenas in Canada or whether Canadians can be sued for breaking an American law.

I’m of the opinion that Canadians are pretty much in the clear, FOR NOW. We have not had a case similar to the precedent setting Verizon debacle, and any extradition treaties wouldn’t be applicable since no crime was committed inside American borders. I may have a pretty weak understanding of the law in this case, so if I’m totally off then let me know.

2

Canada is a bit of a special case, since they have additional rights to copy music, in exchange for rather high levies on CD-Rs.

3

You are kind of off the mark. Canada – like many other nations – does have extensive copyright treaties with the U.S. While it may be more inconvenient for them to gather all paperwork and stuff they need to launch a suit, the possibility still exists through the international treaties (like the Berne convention).

For example: I am in the process of filing a copyright infringement suit against a Swiss film company. I have to file here in Canada and if we win our prima facie case, then we have to take another step in order for the judgement to be enforced in Switzerland – no small feat, but still possible depending on the treaties that exist.

Besides that, the RIAA has a working relationship with the CRIA, so it’s likely only a matter of time before they try to approach things that way.

Smack-Fu Canada isn’t that much of a special case. There is s developing area for copying material for private use (particularly for “time-shifiting” e.g. taping a TV show so you can watch it later.) But in the case of the RIAA suing file-sharing folks – that’s still in violation of copyright laws.

4

EEK! Quick note! The U.S. (IIRC) is not a part of the Berne Convention – I was just using Berne as an example of a bunch of nations getting together to hammer out a fancy treaty for copyright laws.

Didn’t mean to confuse!

5

It’s illegal to share music in Canada but it’s not illegal to copy music for personal use due to the levy mentioned by SmackFu.

According to the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC - cpcc.ca)

6

bcflyer, I was under the impression that American’s had to pay a similar levy. Is this not the case? Also, copying music for personal use likely assumes that you already own and have paid for the song you are copying, does it not?

Back to the main issue, though we may have copyright treaties with America, I am still wondering whether the RIAA or the Canadian counterpart would be able to issue the subpoenas here that they have successfully issued south of the border. As far as I know, we have no precedent for such action. Am I missing something?

7

The U.S. joined the Berne Convention in 1988.

8

American’s do pay a levy but it is collected differently. I also don’t think it was ammended to include CD-Rs etc. but I could be wrong and don’t have time to look for a cite.

I’m quite sure that we have more freedoms in Canada (due to a higher levy). The CPCC collects the levy and gives it to artists. So I am allowed to buy a CD, copy it and then give the orignal away. I could also buy a CD, copy it for myself, lend the CD to a friend and they could copy it. They could give the CD back to me and it’s legal. You don’t need to own the source material. The levy paid reimburses the artist.

Cites - http://cpcc.ca, http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml

9

ChordedZither – Really??? … Uh, did I know that already?..

trying to determine if I’m having brain-cramps or if there is a hole in the IP section of my brain…

I thought they were still avoiding the Berne Convention. Yet it is not possible for me NOT to have come across that while going over contract law… :confused: Gah! I’ve got some reading to do tonight sigh if only the legal books weren’t so painfully dry…

To the OP:

Do you mean the supoenas tendered to Verizon in order to get them to cough up the names of their file-sharing customers? Or the supoenas that went out to the file-sharing naughties that said “show up in court on this day 'cause we’re suing your butt”?

(Not quite sure I understand the question.)

If it’s the latter, then yeah, you can be sued by whoever legally represents the holder of the copyrighted material that is being infringed. Which means you’ll get your supoena and have to show up in court and prove that you weren’t infringing. This is nothing new.

I’ve never really understood why the media say it’s “precendent-setting” because as far as I can tell, the only precendent set is that the medium is new.

File-sharing naughties are essentially being sued the same way that pirates (who make bogus CDs) do. It’s usually not cost-effective to sue the smaller-volume pirates because often you spend more in legal fees than what you recoup in damages. But for the file-sharing naughties who have shared thousands of songs, the damages are much more substantial so it’s more worth the while to do so. Again, it’s not new just not very common.

Well, maybe it is new to go after the little weenies who’ve just been goofing around at home sharing music for fun, rather than the more organized crime CD/DVD pirates who manufacture bogus copies for a profit… But still, you distribute thousands of unlicenced copies you’re gonna get in doo-doo. File-sharing just allows you to share/distribute enough to get into the doo-doo range pretty quickly.

10

Eats_Crayons, I specifically meant the supoenas directing Verizon to release the names of its users.

11

Well, there is the international cyber-crime treaty,Sklyarov (a Russian) being imprisioned in the U.S. for “circumventing” security measures (rot-13, FYI)

I also remember a Swiss (or Swedish… European anyhow) teenager being smacked down for some U.S. law related to computing, even though what he did was perfectly legal where he was. Can’t remember the details, but I recall being quite annoyed.

Anyway, I wouldn’t feel too secure if I were you.

12

The kid’s name’s Jon Johansen, from Norway. I like you was rather pissed at how he was treated and the unfair way people in the States were treated (the zine 2600 was sued for linking to the DeCSS code wile the New York Times did it without getting so much as a nasty letter).
Anyway, a lot of the details of it can be found
Here .

Note to the Mods: I hope that link is okay. I tried to avoid the “Warez” type sites when searching for a link. If it’s not then please remove the link and forgive my mistake

13

I never understood how that was legal. How can US FBI agents arrest a Norwegian citizen, in Norway, for breaking a US law? Was this some kind of Manuel Noriega-style capture operation or something? Does this mean that anyone, anywhere who buys Cuban cigars can be whisked away by die Amerikaner Polizei?

14

Do Canadians pay signifigantly more for CD-Rs than Americans do? In the US, the types of CD-Rs which are specific to the CD “music recorders” which have appeared in the last few years are far more expensive than the standard “data” CD-Rs that computer users have been burning for many a year. I believe this is, basically, to cover the cost of copyright infringement. Are all CD-Rs in Canada subjected to these fees, or just those specifically aimed at recording music?

15

Ohhh. Well that’s not new either. In fact, if you read most privacy agreements from ISPs they state “we will not release any information about you to third parties unless compelled to by law.” I’m not sure why Verizon was trying to fight it actually. You plop down an injunction and that’s the “requirement by law” they were asking for.

Frequently, even that isn’t required. I talked to the security rep for a major ISP about a guy who was giving away mini-disc copies of copyrighted work owned by one of our clients. All I had to do was send a letter to him bearing the signature of the copyright owner and the guy’s website was shut down and his service suspended for terms-of-service violations. No supoena was necessary and our company’s lawyer never even got involved.

Also, in Canada there is a neat kind of all-purpose injunction that IP lawyers use to confiscate stuff – it has some kind of superhero-like name (I can look it up when I get home). Our IP lawyer new another lawyer whose job it was to confiscate the cases of street vendors who were selling fake Gucci watches and similar counterfeit stuff. He’d walk up, plop down the injunction and say “gimme your case!” The idea behind it is to prevent you from destroying all the evidence before your court date.

E.g. suppose a DVD pirate had 5000 copies of The Matrix in his basement and then got served with papers to appear in court – well, duh! He’s going to get rid of the stuff. The injunction allows the lawyers to have the material confiscated and then it’s held in trust until the case is settled.

It’s not a warrant (and if IIRC if the lawyer were to show up at your house you could deny him/her entry to get the stuff), but it’s still kind of neat. I’ve always wondered if a lawyer would show up at a file sharer’s house with a couple constables to say “gimme your computer.” (Best imagned with the voice of the Hulk – “Rahr! Gimme computer! Rahr!”)

<hijack>
So I was chatting with one of the lawyers I work with:

Me: “So… the U.S. joined the Berne Convention in 1988?..”

Lawyer (dubiously): “Yeah… 1989 actually…”

Me: “Er,… did I know this already?”

Lawyer: “Yes, you idiot! And we’ve had this conversation already!”

Me: “Oh… er, when?”

Lawyer: “Six months ago – And you aready knew it then too. Gah!”

Well, good to know I’m losing my mind.

</hijack>

16

We pay a $0.21 levy on regular CD-Rs and and a $0.40 levy on “Music” CD-Rs.

A spindle of 50 regular 80 min CD-Rs typically costs between $25 - $35 CDN.
Cites:

Levy Info from http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml
Prices from http://www.ncix.com

17

So if the RIAA is already being paid for the songs people download out of what people pay for blank CDs then not only is downloading not stealing it’s not even copright infringement because the music has been paid for!

18

Anton Piller orders.

For more detail, go here: “Recent Developments in Anton Piller Orders: John and Jane Doe, rolling along in Canada”