After Bill C-11 was introduced in 2013, Canadian pirates lawful copy archivists were not pleased to find that the personal copy provision would be struck from law. The Harper government pursued copyright-extending provisions in trade agreements with the sort of zest previously limited to Disney’s lawyers. With the death of personal copying, something had to fill the void of Canada’s once great personal music collections.
Enter Pirate Streaming
In repeated court hearings, courts found that pirate streaming portals (such as the late Putlocker) infringe copyright by making copyrighted content available without licensing it from the owners. But the court findings have also upheld the right to view: Streaming a movie from a pirate portal makes a brief, temporary copy of fragments of the file, and these temporary copies are explicitly excluded from being a copyright violation under Bill-C11 (Now the “Copyright Modernization Act”).
Pirate boxes illegal
Courts have also found that pre-loaded Kodi boxes violate the DMCA-like provision on digital content locks, and are thus illegal to sell or distribute in Canada.
Notice-and-Notice
Canada adopted Notice-and-Notice for copyright infringement as part of the Copyright Modernization Act, which took effect in 2014.
Canada’s Notice-and-Notice system raised eyebrows with privacy advocates for mandating 6-month internet history logs (for purposes of court proceedings in copyright affairs). But it also raised hackles with American copyright trolls like Prenda, whose threats are toothless under Canadian law: mass suits against copyright infringers are highly likely to succeed under the new system.
CRTC board member Michael Geist explains how the system works:
Under the notice-and-notice system, copyright owners are entitled to send infringement notices to Internet providers, who are legally required to forward the notifications to their subscribers. The notices must include details on the sender, the copyright works and the alleged infringement. If the Internet provider fails to forward the notification, it must explain why or face the prospect of damages that run as high as $10,000. Internet providers must also retain information on the subscriber for six months (or 12 months if court proceedings are launched).
There are important benefits for Internet users as well. First, unlike the content takedown or access cut-off systems, the Canadian notice approach does not feature any legal penalties. The notices do not create any fines or damages, but rather are designed as educational tools to raise awareness of infringement allegations.
[…]
Second, the personal information of subscribers is not disclosed to the copyright owner. When the Internet provider forwards the copyright notice, only they know the identity of the subscriber and that information is not disclosed to any third party.
If the copyright owner is unhappy with only sending a notification and wants to proceed with further legal action, they must go to court to obtain an order requiring the Internet provider to reveal the identity of the subscriber. Canadian courts have established strict rules and limitations around such disclosures.
further reading:
