Cdn file swap case continues
Justice von Finckenstein
- Toronto Star
p2pnet.net News:- The CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association) is in a quandry: it wants to sue Canadian file sharers in the same way the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) is suing Americans who swap music online.
But it can't get rolling without identifying 29 people it claims have swapped unauthorised music files and it can't do that without a court order compelling the ISPs with whom the 29 have their Internet accounts to reveal names. And four of the five ISPs the CRIA is trying to cow just aren't cooperating.
The CRIA launched its attack in mid-February in a case being heard by Justice Konrad von Finckenstein who, because he wanted more information on the motion's 'technical requirements,' and on how it would affect privacy legislation, adjourned until yesterday.
Now things are moving again. But the data the CRIA wants to get its hands on are theoretically locked away behind the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses assigned to each of the 29 people it's targetting.
We say 'theoretically' because using IP addresses to identify individuals is a "complicated and imperfect process at best," as Joel Watson, a lawyer representing Telus Corp, one of the ISPs involved, is quoted as saying in Angela Pacienza's Canadian Press story here, going on, "It will never identify who was using the PC at the time."
Back to that in a minute.
For now, the CRIA which, like the RIAA and many other similar 'trade' organs around the world is 100% owned by the Big Five record labels, has already succeeded in creating a highly public environment where music sharers are being cast as criminals.
Which is, of course, precisely what Big Music wants.
Across the border in the US, the RIAA has sued, or is suing, more than 1,000 people. Yet not one case has gone to court because Big Music's victims are for the most part individuals (mostly teenagers) and their parents who simply don't have the financial or legal resources to stand up to Big Music's highly paid legal teams.
In all instances they settled out of court. Some victims paid $US10,000 and more, but most of them ended up paying the music industry amounts in the $US2,000-$US3,000 range. (No one knows what happens to the money and the RIAA even managed to use some of the teenagers it victimized in a commercial advertising campaign.)
The CRIA confidently expects similar results in Canada, which means the Big Five labels win the battle by default and people who don't bow to their dictates by buying 'product' defined and priced by them through services owned and/or supported by them are labelled 'copyright violating criminals', and prosecuted.
For now, though, it has to establish the parameters - and make sure everyone concerned knows who's in charge and that, believes the corporate music industry with some justification, is the corporate music industry.
IP addresses
Vidéotron is the only company not opposing the CRIA because its owner, Quebecor, "is also concerned about piracy in other parts of its business, which includes newspapers, television, Internet services and CDs," says the story.
It goes on that CRIA lawyer Ronald Dimock argued the five Internet providers involved - the others are Bell Sympatico and Rogers Communications - "can't hide behind privacy legislation because those laws don't cover protecting illegal activity."
He also said ISPs "are often ordered by the courts to reveal the identities of clients for police and banks".
But revealing the identity of a client isn't the same as discovering the identity of an individual through an IP address.
IP addresses are complicated and simple at the same time. Each one looks something like this: 123.45.67.08 (go here for a little more on the subject) and can almost be called a Net phone number that represents a unique computer on the Internet.
One of the questions the music industry has to answer is:
How can you guarantee a particular individual was online and transferring files at any particular time? A telephone can be used by anyone who happens to be near it, day or night. So unless you're somehow 'watching' the phone, how do you prove a particular person was using it?
The same applies to computers.
Be that as it may, as far as IP addresses go, there are a number of reasons - some highly technical - why they're by no means a sure way of identifying individuals.
The CRIA says the 29 (for the moment) people it's after each has an IP address and the ISPs should therefore be able to put a name to a number and voila! - there's the identity of the 'criminal' file sharer.
But the music industry enforcement unit knows full well that's far from being the case.
"Telus and Shaw Communications said linking actual names with the handles [Internet nicknames] and IP addresses isn't easy," says CP. "It requires the companies to analyse data and use deductive reasoning to make accusations against their customers. They maintain the information is not 100 per cent reliable."
"The case, which will continue Monday, is challenging several legal issues including copyright and privacy laws and individuals' right to anonymity," says CP. "The decision could pose ramifications far beyond the 29 individuals currently being sought."
That's because central to the case is the question of copyrights and following ideas originally dreamed up by the RIAA, the CRIA claims Canadians who share 'unauthorised' music belong to a particularly low form of criminal life called Copyright Violators.
University of Ottawa Law School professor Michael Geist has some interesting, and pertinent, views on the subect in which he points out that, "Supporters of copyright reform have often sought to label their opponents as thieves looking for free music or pirated movies."
In the meanwhile, "There was also a lengthy debate Friday about what the recording industry association intends to do with the information should the order be granted," says the CP report.
"They'll follow the practice of their American cousins ... (lawsuits will be) nothing more than threats," said Charles Scott, a lawyer representing Shaw."
[UPDATE: Jesse Jordan was one of the first US teenagers to be sued by the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). Go here for a letter from his father, Andy, to Canadian families who might find themselves in the firing line.]
(Saturday 13th March 2004)
Justice von Finckenstein
- Toronto Star
p2pnet.net News:- The CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association) is in a quandry: it wants to sue Canadian file sharers in the same way the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) is suing Americans who swap music online.
But it can't get rolling without identifying 29 people it claims have swapped unauthorised music files and it can't do that without a court order compelling the ISPs with whom the 29 have their Internet accounts to reveal names. And four of the five ISPs the CRIA is trying to cow just aren't cooperating.
The CRIA launched its attack in mid-February in a case being heard by Justice Konrad von Finckenstein who, because he wanted more information on the motion's 'technical requirements,' and on how it would affect privacy legislation, adjourned until yesterday.
Now things are moving again. But the data the CRIA wants to get its hands on are theoretically locked away behind the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses assigned to each of the 29 people it's targetting.
We say 'theoretically' because using IP addresses to identify individuals is a "complicated and imperfect process at best," as Joel Watson, a lawyer representing Telus Corp, one of the ISPs involved, is quoted as saying in Angela Pacienza's Canadian Press story here, going on, "It will never identify who was using the PC at the time."
Back to that in a minute.
For now, the CRIA which, like the RIAA and many other similar 'trade' organs around the world is 100% owned by the Big Five record labels, has already succeeded in creating a highly public environment where music sharers are being cast as criminals.
Which is, of course, precisely what Big Music wants.
Across the border in the US, the RIAA has sued, or is suing, more than 1,000 people. Yet not one case has gone to court because Big Music's victims are for the most part individuals (mostly teenagers) and their parents who simply don't have the financial or legal resources to stand up to Big Music's highly paid legal teams.
In all instances they settled out of court. Some victims paid $US10,000 and more, but most of them ended up paying the music industry amounts in the $US2,000-$US3,000 range. (No one knows what happens to the money and the RIAA even managed to use some of the teenagers it victimized in a commercial advertising campaign.)
The CRIA confidently expects similar results in Canada, which means the Big Five labels win the battle by default and people who don't bow to their dictates by buying 'product' defined and priced by them through services owned and/or supported by them are labelled 'copyright violating criminals', and prosecuted.
For now, though, it has to establish the parameters - and make sure everyone concerned knows who's in charge and that, believes the corporate music industry with some justification, is the corporate music industry.
IP addresses
Vidéotron is the only company not opposing the CRIA because its owner, Quebecor, "is also concerned about piracy in other parts of its business, which includes newspapers, television, Internet services and CDs," says the story.
It goes on that CRIA lawyer Ronald Dimock argued the five Internet providers involved - the others are Bell Sympatico and Rogers Communications - "can't hide behind privacy legislation because those laws don't cover protecting illegal activity."
He also said ISPs "are often ordered by the courts to reveal the identities of clients for police and banks".
But revealing the identity of a client isn't the same as discovering the identity of an individual through an IP address.
IP addresses are complicated and simple at the same time. Each one looks something like this: 123.45.67.08 (go here for a little more on the subject) and can almost be called a Net phone number that represents a unique computer on the Internet.
One of the questions the music industry has to answer is:
How can you guarantee a particular individual was online and transferring files at any particular time? A telephone can be used by anyone who happens to be near it, day or night. So unless you're somehow 'watching' the phone, how do you prove a particular person was using it?
The same applies to computers.
Be that as it may, as far as IP addresses go, there are a number of reasons - some highly technical - why they're by no means a sure way of identifying individuals.
The CRIA says the 29 (for the moment) people it's after each has an IP address and the ISPs should therefore be able to put a name to a number and voila! - there's the identity of the 'criminal' file sharer.
But the music industry enforcement unit knows full well that's far from being the case.
"Telus and Shaw Communications said linking actual names with the handles [Internet nicknames] and IP addresses isn't easy," says CP. "It requires the companies to analyse data and use deductive reasoning to make accusations against their customers. They maintain the information is not 100 per cent reliable."
"The case, which will continue Monday, is challenging several legal issues including copyright and privacy laws and individuals' right to anonymity," says CP. "The decision could pose ramifications far beyond the 29 individuals currently being sought."
That's because central to the case is the question of copyrights and following ideas originally dreamed up by the RIAA, the CRIA claims Canadians who share 'unauthorised' music belong to a particularly low form of criminal life called Copyright Violators.
University of Ottawa Law School professor Michael Geist has some interesting, and pertinent, views on the subect in which he points out that, "Supporters of copyright reform have often sought to label their opponents as thieves looking for free music or pirated movies."
In the meanwhile, "There was also a lengthy debate Friday about what the recording industry association intends to do with the information should the order be granted," says the CP report.
"They'll follow the practice of their American cousins ... (lawsuits will be) nothing more than threats," said Charles Scott, a lawyer representing Shaw."
[UPDATE: Jesse Jordan was one of the first US teenagers to be sued by the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). Go here for a letter from his father, Andy, to Canadian families who might find themselves in the firing line.]
(Saturday 13th March 2004)