No Anti-BitTorrent Precedent Achieved in Canada
Written by enigmax on July 12, 2008Following comments which suggested that the closure of QuebecTorrent was “a major victory” for the recording industry, we have a statement from the owner of the site to balance things up. The smaller battle against this site is over, the larger one against Canadian BitTorrent sites in general appears unaffected.
Yesterday we reported that, following a legal battle against 31 media industry organizations, the 85,000 member QuebecTorrent tracker had been forced to close. The site complied with a permanent injunction handed down by the Superior Court of Quebec. The recording industry, on the other hand, dropped its claim for $200,000 damages.
Solange Drouin, managing director of ADISQ, an organization that represents the music industry in Québec, said in a response to the shutdown: “We wait to see the result of this first lawsuit. We hope that this result will have a dissuasive effect. If it is not the case, it is possible that we will engage in actions against similar sites.”
Some may be under the impression that the closure of QuebecTorrent is a big legal victory for the entertainment industry. Although undoubtedly the media companies will be delighted that the site has been shuttered, due to how the case ended we’re not really much closer to the answer of torrent site legality in Canada.
Instead of mounting a poor defense, in the end QuebecTorrent chose not to mount one at all. The site’s lawyer, Sébastien Leblond, said that part of the reason for accepting the injunction to close the site was that Doditz, the site admin, wanted to avoid the case setting a bad anti-torrent legal precedent: “Instead of going to war without the proper equipment, we decided not to hurt the big case,” said Leblond.
In comments to the National Post, Michael Geist, a law professor at University of Ottawa, said he wasn’t surprised that 28 year old Brûlotte decided not to fight:
“The prospect of both the legal fees and the big organizations on the other side who are prepared to spend millions of dollars on litigation has an enormous chilling effect. Invariably, individual users, web sites, cave in the face of these kinds of legal demands.”
So, the entertainment might make it seem that the outcome of this case is a huge victory, the reality is more nuanced. Here is a message from ‘Doditz’ which should hopefully shine some light on what actually happened with the case:
Statement from Sébastien Brûlotte, aka ‘Doditz’, owner of QuebecTorrent
It is with regret that we decided to comply with an injunction against our torrent site, our company and myself as president of Québectorrent.com Inc.
I take the opportunity in this release to thank you for your support since the opening of the site, as well as throughout the judicial proceedings. Without you, this whole adventure would not have been so rewarding. Together with the community we have helped give visibility to artists by making available an alternative platform for cheaper distribution and equally effective wider recognition of their works.
I also want to explain my decision not to challenge the injunction we were served with, against which we have always expressed our disagreement.
The upheavals have caused “torrent” and “p2p” sites to have a significant impact on trade and distribution of music, movies and any work protected by copyright.
At the time we had to take a decision about defending our interests before the courts, against both the recording and film industries, represented by ADISQ and APFTQ, we found that users and operators of sites such as “torrent” and “p2p” were governed by clearly outdated laws which are non-adapted to current and modern technology.
We urge our governments to intervene in this area and to legislate so as to reflect current realities and the needs of its population. It goes without saying that this reality does not only cover the interests and needs of distribution companies, which will inevitably adjust to the market. It covers more than ever, consumers of music and films, without whom the industries would not be affluent today. The legislature must listen to those consumers who are an important part of the population.
Also, I must respond to how ADISQ commented on the judgement of the Court. The vice-president of public affairs and CEO of ADISQ, Mrs. Solange Drouin, commented that “it was a first major victory for local industry against a torrent site and that other suits against such download sites could be considered.”
At the time the procedures we were served, we had hired an attorney who, for health reasons, had to stop representing us last March. Subsequently, in early May, we hired the law firm Fetch Legal Ltd to represent us. Our prosecutors indicated then that the progress of the case was limited, and that we should require a court deadline to enable them to bring the case to state, and position us well in our defense. Expertise was necessary to file a defense to counter that of ADISQ and the APFTQ. Only two months remained before the hearing. Our prosecutors recommended that we submit a request for surrender of the hearing. ADISQ and the APFTQ were opposed to this request. As a result, and following arguments from ADISQ and the APFTQ, the court refused our request for surrender, and ordered the trial to go ahead as planned on July 2008.
Given this state of affairs in the best interest of members who have supported us financially and helped “torrent” and “p2p” sites we chose not to mount a defense, rather than defend ourselves inappropriately.
It goes without saying that our intention was to avoid a legal precedent detrimental to any litigation of the same nature.
We believe we have made the right decision in this aspect, as pointed out aptly by Tristan Péloquin in his blog dated 10 July. We are surprised by the position of the ADISQ and the APFTQ to the effect that this ruling is a precedent, since in fact, there has never been a substantive debate about the issues raised by the dispute.
Ultimately, it was never our intention, in connection with the operation of our site, to allow the violation of copyrights, as claimed by the allegations contained in the judicial proceedings. We are convinced that the Court could make an interesting decision in the case if it had to assess contradictory positions, which it did not have to make…..
We still intend to abide by the terms of the injunction issued against us, but speak to correct certain statements made publicly in recent days.
Sébastien Brûlotte, president of Québectorrent.com
Previously: Comcast Ordered to Stop BitTorrent Traffic Interference
Next: BitTorrent Host Loses in Court, Site Moves to Sweden
37 Responses
I agree, it’s hardly the great “legal victory” the industry is crowing about. He absolutely did the right thing by backing down. The issues at stake when the big legal fight does come are too important to be decided on a forced and hurried defense.
Indeed it is not even a legal victory it is merely bully the French and win strategy. Which is not really a shocker since the french here have little interest in their internet rights for the most part. The media there has refused to cover anything on bill c61 aka Canadian ver of dmca. Unless it is for the bill in which case it boasts all the BS of trying to help artists. Because ya it has worked so well in the USA.
Slowly but surely all nations will comply with the USA cause they are clearly the number one nation and know all… Hell a 2 party system, spreading corpocracy threw out the middle east. Clearly they know what they are doing because the majority of Americans are wise patriotic people that would never let their government abuse the power they have given them in their name…
One thing thats on everyones minds (or just mine) and that you have not written about: What about all their users data? has that been destroyed? has it been requested or given or anything?
Would appreciate a reply to the above
Thanks!
ezee.se
I am soliciting the support of readers of TorrentFreak -
I am attempting to create an informal e-mail group for the purposes of discussion on how we can take action to start a political movement to change copyright law.
If you wish to help, here is the pledge to sign:
http://www.28chan.org/pledge.php
Torrent suckz, basically its just r3t4rd3d lam3rs that are using such sh!tty protocol.
…and f**k this filter on torrentfreak.
Torrentfreak are making $$$ of their sh!tty ads. Malmware ads that are infecting users with tr0jans.
Its nice to see that you smoke weed. but being an asshole is a bitch move… whats funny is that you took the time to type the comment.
It’s understandable for him to back down.
Well, it seems that the only torrent site that has the BALLS and the COURAGE for fighting this hard battle (against the criminals media cartels from USA) even the end, assuming all the consequences, is The Pirate Bay (TPB); Long live to them!!!
Much of the rest, finish with a “negotiation” or “agreement” with the media offenders, creating a bad precedent for the torrent community.
shameful really…
The problem with copyright is not the price. The problem with copyright is that it makes original creators think they can be so arrogant and force people to give money. The fact is that the individual is the one who should be in control, not the original creator. The individual’s ideas on what is the value of the work, and what can be done with the work, are not any less valid than those of the original creator. Unfortunately, copyright elevates the original creator’s claims, and makes them unbelievably arrogant.
Izumi, when are you going to stop SPAMMING that URL all over TF?
wow.. though seriously in that speech he shoulda been like..
‘all you were gonna do is crush us with your millions, so we decided to psych you out.. haha bitches no case for you’
fuck them, all they want to do is control everything and throw there customers in jail.
As soon as I find that there might be someone who might be helpful.
I had been calling for some kind of social movement to change the law for some time, but unfortunately, it seems like most people here are just lazy and don’t ever want to do anything.
Therefore, I am looking for some place where there are people who are actually motivated to do SOMETHING.
This url is to look for people who are actually motivated, so that I can establish contact with them through e-mail.
As I have said to others before, the best way is to distribute derivative works, like that Harry Potter Lexicon for which RDR Books is currently being sued.
I call to you all to distribute this Harry Potter Lexicon on the streets. Of course, it would be preferred if there were proper organization and coordination, but any action would be good.
Unfortunately, it seems like most people here are lazy people who just can’t seem to get off their lazy bu.tts.
We need to engage in civil disobedience!
There is the Harry Potter Lexicon that RDR Books is currently being sued for. We need to get out there and distribute this Harry Potter Lexicon on the streets!
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/
This is the harry potter lexicon. RDR books is currently trying to make it a book, but Warner Bros. is suing them for copyright. We need to get on the streets and distribute this Harry Potter Lexicon in hard copy as civil disobedience!
sensei dude,
distribute whatever you want but not that crap
harry potter is not a book, it is printed toilet paper sheets glued together
@13
See, this is the problem. You think it’s all about promoting Harry Potter but it’s not. Whenever I call to people to take action, they really don’t seem to get the message. The message is that the law is unjust, and we must break the law in an act of civil disobedience to show that it is unjust. I really don’t get why you think Harry Potter has anything to do with this because it doesn’t. The issue is copyright, not Harry Potter.
I already know that Harry Potter is crap but that’s not the reason why I am calling for you people to distribute the lexicon on the streets. I am calling for you people to distribute the lexicon on the streets because of the copyright lawsuit - the lawsuit is the issue here, not Harry Potter.
I mean, why can’t people focus on the issue here? I talk about breaking copyright law, and you people get all distracted about Harry Potter.
Hahahah… Malmware.
Izumi-sensei:” Unfortunately, it seems like most people here are lazy people who just can’t seem to get off their lazy bu.tts.”
Okay, here’s everything you need to change copyright law. Read closely.
You need powerful political and corporate connections, an army of lawyers on retention, and an annual budget of hundreds of millions of dollars to out-lobby the MAFIAA with.
There’s your answer. Not activism and not social movements, because neither of those things feed the greed of the policymakers.
If you really want to have an effect, then forget about changing the laws and focus on the improvement and future development of filesharing protocals towards the goal of a decentralized P2P system where an ISP thinks you’re surfing Google when you’re actually downloading and/or uploading a screener copy of Iron Man 2, because at that point it won’t matter what the copyright laws are anymore.
P.S.
And HAHA on me for forgetting to close the italics tag.
@17
Social movements are always more powerful. Why don’t I ever see the EFF mentioned in newspapers? Because they are not a political organization; they are a legal organization. The chief players in politics are political organizations that initiate the power of the people. The greed of the policymakers are ultimately for the votes; policymakers do not do things for money. They do things for votes. Activism and social movements are the only way to go. What’s going to stop the ISPs from implementing a strong policy against file-sharing? What’s going to stop new laws and treaties from being passed? Ultimately, the problem is with the law itself. And this problem can be solved only by a people’s movement like the SCLC.
Nobody has ever changed the law with powerful connections. This is just utter nonsense. Power comes from popular approval.
Money makes a difference, but a small difference. Think about the progressive era in the U.S. in the 1900’s. How did this come about? Not because a big organization like the EFF did big things, but rather because it spiraled upwards from the people electing progressive governors, muckrakers making publications, and general public outcry against things like the Northeast Securities.
This is how change is intiated.
Izumi-sensei: “The greed of the policymakers are ultimately for the votes”
The greed of the policymakers are ultimately for wealth and power. Voting is nothing more than one of several means to that end.
Why do you think lobbyists run rampant in politics? Why do you think so many politicans have ties to huge corporations?
It’s because indulging in bribery and corruption is the easiest way to get what they want. The electorate? They outlive their usefullness the moment the polls close.
Even if you spearhead a massive social movement, what’s the best outcome you can hope for? Being lied to and told what you want to hear during election time, and then ignored once the dust settles.
And if so many people are on your side that you manage to vote out the incumbents next election, it’ll only result in more of the same crooks coming in to replace them.
These aren’t the romantinc times of Gandhi, or the civil rights movement, or Haight-Ashbury anymore. The political machine has become corrupt far beyond the point where social movements can effect it.
Izumi-sensei: “What’s going to stop the ISPs from implementing a strong policy against file-sharing? What’s going to stop new laws and treaties from being passed?”
When it’s impossible to detect filesharing activity by analyzing ‘net traffic, how can those policies and laws and treatise be enforced? They can’t. That’s the real step forward.
Izumi-sensei: “Power comes from popular approval.”
Ouch. You’ve got some rough lessons to learn.
First I’d like to say point blank to Sébastien: Monsieur, your site is closed and you’re a quitter, not a hero, the least you spoke now the better, don’t pretend to be some sort of “authority” on the subject”.
Second, the very fact that your site can’t have list or track any torrents and you yourself must stay away from p2p for good or else it’s prison and dizzying fees, is proof positive that, YES, a precedent has been against BiTorrent and you guys are irresponsible to lure people into a lost cause. BitTorrent is a disgrace and is destroying P2P with too much publicity and “celebrity” seeking p2pers. Like the guys that run this Torrentfreak blog: all at the service of certain Private Trackers they belong to and upload to but never talk about. There’s not a single unbiased article in the whole story of this overrated fan blog. So stop talking about “balanced views”. Real reporters in a serious site would give both sides the same space to express their views and focus on the true facts. Stop the spin, stop fooling the gullible readers that might take you for some reliable source of information. High time someone wrote about Torrentfreak bloggers and which Private Trackers they are staff at and even ranked as power uploaders, for example… You are biased to the core, sirs,and this is lame propaganda and an ego trip, not journalism and definitely not to the benefit of freedom of file sharing. You are the *IAAs best allies.
@22
“These aren’t the romantinc times of Gandhi, or the civil rights movement, or Haight-Ashbury anymore. The political machine has become corrupt far beyond the point where social movements can effect it.”
Then you must have no clue about history. This is not the 1900’s or the Gilded Age any more. Almost all the political machines are already gone. Boss Tweed has been busted more than 100 years ago. Political machines are no longer prevalent, and social movements now have much more potential than they had in the past.
Lobbyist run wild because they always have run wild. Smoking lobbyists have run wild, spreading lies that they do not cause harm. But eventually the truth gets out in the end because of determined individuals.
It really makes no sense to say that corrupt political machines are running things. The time when poor clueless immigrants constituted most of the votes is over. Most political machines have been voted out or busted, because times have changed.
I really don’t know where you are getting this nonsense from, but you really seem to be making up facts left and right. What are you trying to do, discourage people from taking action?
The real problem is that people will just not get out there and take action.
The problem is the law itself, not how to get around the law. Even if it can easily be done, the fact is that popular approval will not come, and people will continue to think of it as a “criminal act” if people do not try to do it openly and through legal avenues. The law should be respected, and when the law is not respectable, it should be changed. If you do not want to change a law, but want to break it anyways, then it comes off as mere hypocrisy and general willingness to commit crimes.
The biggest problem is social approval and what they say in newspapers. It doesn’t matter if people can break copyright law all the time if it is socially disapproved. File-sharing needs to be a legitimate part of culture, and as long as it’s against the law, it cannot be a legitimate part of culture. If we believe that what we do is right, then why should we stand denunciations from the public?
The best I can hope for is that when the law does not change, that the masses will get out on the streets and do massive distribution of copyrighted works, so that either:
1. millions of people will get sued, and agitation for copyright change will increase or
2. nobody or only a few get sued, and copyright is no longer enforced.
When millions of people break a law in the open agitating for the change in the law, the law will be changed.
@23
the very fact that your site can’t have list or track any torrents and you yourself must stay away from p2p for good or else it’s prison and dizzying fees, is proof positive that, YES, a precedent has been against BiTorrent and you guys are irresponsible to lure people into a lost cause.
Wow. The Canadian MAFIAA really need to get some prunes in their diet. That much constipation could be fatal.
@23
“BitTorrent is a disgrace and is destroying P2P with too much publicity and ‘celebrity’ seeking p2pers.”
This does not make sense. Publicity is a very good thing. And “celebrities” are essentially prominent people who might be influential, behind which we can all support.
The purpose of P2P is not to be some kind of illegal activity ring. P2Pers are not out there to be criminals. P2P’s goal is not to be some kind of hidden criminal network that those companies cannot find. The goal is not to hide from the public, but rather to be accepted by the public. Why would people want to hide from the public? Danger of prosecution? Why yes, there is the danger, which is all the more reason that it should be done. The fact is that the law itself is unjust, and it should be changed, and for there to be more danger of prosecution is more opportunity to challenge the law. Moreover, the fact is that popular support is very much important.
I really do not understand this nonsense about P2P being some kind of “underground network for us to benefit ourselves.” It’s about spreading things to the public, doing some public service.
26: “That much constipation could be fatal.”
The technical term for that particular blockage is being “impacted.” Remember that the next time you hear some idiot executive saying something-or-the-other has “impacted” him. ^_~
It was bound to happen eventually - if you keep trying to turn nouns into verbs, you’re bound to stumble across one that already had a meaning.
Obviously you are full of good intentions, you are an idealist, but we are at a point where the average people considers all our freedom talk like “blabla”.
Do you remember that dancing cow in Homer Simpson’s brain ? That’s exactly how your talk would be perceived by the average people. They are so afraid someone could steal something from them, that they’d be against distributing harry potter crap. It just would be “bad”, accordingly to their brainwashing.
So distribute copies, wait for half an hour until someone reports you to the cops, and wait your trial (maybe in Guantanamo, since that would probably be interpreted as communist behaviour)
So if you want to have an effect, wait until a 5 yo kid gets dismembered by a maniac, and tell everyone the psycho was from MAFIAA.
It will be a horrible lie, but people will believe it. Because they believe anything when they are shocked (remember 9-11, iraq war, etc etc… ?)
Read the latest Naomi Klein’s book if you want to know more about the shock strategy.
@ Izumi-sensei
Oss :)
Please stop hijacking every comment section on TF with your own agenda. If you must, use the P2PFreak forum to raise awareness but you have to stop taking the discussion off topic.
When people start turning against your publicity methods, that should be a sign to try another approach :)
#28 Jul 13, 2008 at 09:22 by enigmax
Thank you for that..
He’s distracting me from watching the ???? from putting their toothpaste back in the tube.
They can’t shut down torrents. If one goes down today, ten more will rise. It’s just the power of the net.
Can you invest in a laywer without
needing one?
We have even recently heard from major label regarding our sharing site (ultimatesharing.com) that they now allow us to post their material. It turns out, they admitted to us, that file sharing actually helps their bottom line - and the only reason the big companies try to stop it is for anti-trust reasons (so the little guy’s artists and movies can’t break the public consciousness) - there are no significant monetary losses to the companies :D! In fact, most companies gain advertising benefit from sharing I’ve been told.
This isn’t a VICTORY for ANYBODY! The labels are ultimately losing. The big guys that are trying to stop rising new stars are ultiamtely falling and their actions are a last grasp of fear for a dying corrupt regime.
BTW, At ultimatesharing.com, members aggregate and post useful download links from pirate bay, rapidshare, megaupload, anywhere we can find it! Please give it a visit, download, and SHARE.
We’ve been taught since childhood that sharing is the right thing to do. Now we’re supposed to teach our children that sharing is ok so long as it doesn’t hurt some corporations bottom line. Thanks in large part to the way most of us have been raised (the lower to middle classes anyways, including myself) I find it very hard to swallow. If infringing so called copyright is pure evil, then why does it feel so right? It’s the same feeling I get knowing I’ve helped someone in need. Because my government has created laws meant to punish those that make a copy of something, and governments are never wrong or to be questioned, that must mean I’m completely wrong to think and feel as I do and should thus be made bankrupt, demonized, and tossed in jail with all the others of my ilk, we murderers and rapists and file sharers. In what world is any of this sane?
One thing that certainly hasn’t changed since the dawn of time is that big money always wins in the end. Why hold a gun to someones head when simply implying as much works just as well, as has been done in this case? Granted, backing down was the right thing to do seeing as the bigger picture is more important to how the future of file sharing unfolds, but that still doesn’t make it right. The MafIAA does exactly the same thing, dropping cases where a precident they don’t want may come about, so it’s nice to see our side playing ball by the same rules.
Money equals power and power equals control, so it’s not surprising that the one thing corporations fear the most is loss of that control. This is what copyright is really about. It could just as easily be about sharing a toothbrush if the industry thought they might be losing money due to that. What is being shared isn’t so important as the fact that it is being shared. How many of us (corporate goons included) buy a book and share it with our spouse, children, parents, friends, etc? How about when we buy or rent a movie, how many of us enjoy watching it with a group of friends and family on our home theaters? Is file sharing really all that different? Clearly the MPAA and RIAA (and their counterparts in other countries) would like us to believe so based on their actions to date, and I’m willing to bet that if they could somehow get a law passed that prevented us from enjoying our home entertainment with others without paying a fee per head, they would. Money and power, greed and control.
They love to call file sharing “stealing”, but regardless of whether you agree or not, it clearly is anything but. You have to actually lose something physical for it to qualify as being stolen. Duplication is the proper word and the only one that applies. To argue otherwise is to show that you are unable to grasp the simplest of gifts bestowed upon the human race; logical reasoning. Anything else is just wishful thinking, either because they want it to be true, or because they fear it. I guess it probably shouldn’t come as a surprise that those with lots of money tend to see the world through rose colored glasses. Anyone whom has read Wizard’s First Rule will understand where I’m coming from, and if not then I’d be happy to lend you all a copy. ;-)
Here is another line Terry Goodkind fans will be familiar with. “Focus on the solution, not the problem.” The fact is that there are a number of good solutions just waiting to be implemented, ones in which both sides should be able to agree upon. The sad fact however is that the entertainment industry seems completely unwilling to compromise in any area. Again this probably shouldn’t be a surprise I suppose, as most humans seem to have a very difficult time separating logical thought from illogical emotions. I know many on our side would be more than happy to do exactly that provided such solutions implemented were fair and just. I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve read people commenting that they have no trouble with paying a reasonable monthly fee, for example, on their internet bill, allowing them to download without fear of prosecution. I believe solutions like this, and many others, can potentially earn the entertainment industry far more money than they ever have in the past. One can’t help but wonder why they constantly refuse to consider all the great possibilities available, unless you look back on my earlier comment and it truly isn’t about money (which all signs show they have plenty of), but rather control. That and the fact that at this point just about any solution other than the one they’ve adopted (mass suing your customers, yeah that makes good business sense) would mean admitting they were wrong about file sharing all along. As long as you have greedy rich (and likely spoiled) folks at the top being obstinate and making all the decisions, nothing is likely to change for the better any time soon, and we will continue hearing sad stories such as this one for as long as the internet exists.
Speaking of false partiality of the Courts, and the Canadian federal government itself has left the internet unregulated.. at least in part only.. we know that child molesters, child pornography on internet in Canada can be and are often rightfully prosecuted, and that some internet bullies are now being rightfully prosecuted by some provincial human rights commissions, even by some of the courts for slander, abuse now too.. But not all of the the human rights, verbal abusers even now are being adequately dealt with too, nor the internet service providers who lie, are clearly now guilty of being abusive, falsely restrictive, censorship, privacy invasions, guilty false misleading advertising, restrictive business practices, bait and switch approach are not being adequately dealt with and this is unacceptable, a falsely discriminatory practice that now still always too and needs to be fully dealt with too.
http://thenonconformer.wordpress.com
Justice can never be achieved whilst the greedy legal system favours the wealthy
@33 you make a lot of good points. The propaganda industries call file sharing stealing because they claim it deprives starving artists of income. That theory is shot down when it becomes clear that people would not have bought it even if they couldn’t get it free. I suspect this applies to most all. So these majority are doing no harm. Yet the cartels will then say that it’s still theft. Why is it then? Then they begin their false circuitous logic again, proving their ignorance and insincerity.
Sharing media is no different from what has always been legally and morally acceptable. It’s just that now the cartels feel they can more easily control it, being digital, with their DRM crap and easy litigation threats to garnish their ill-gotten funds
It’s like I heard in some video I watched recently, “we can now get $9000 a song rather than $1″. Makes good business sense huh?
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.