Online music swapping legal Canada

[electric]

TORONTO - People who share music files on the internet are safe after a Federal Court rejected a motion on Wednesday that would have allowed the music industry to sue them.

Justice Konrad von Finckenstein said the Canadian Recording Industry Association hadn't shown copyright infringement by 29 people who had allowed their music files to be uploaded



http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/MSN/2004...ad_court040331

[capybara]

wow, a free country!

[joker_927]

Why wouldn't the government pass a law that stops something illegal?

[jkrohn]

Joker, that isn't the point of the ruling. This quote from the article pretty much sums it up.

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings," von Finckenstein wrote in his 28-page ruling. "They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

Jkrohn

[brandon184]

The Canadian government isn't interested in condoning music piracy - they're interested in taking the most logical (and legal) avenues in order to prevent and/or stop it.

[joker_927]

Oh I get it. I didn't give it to anyone, they just came into my shared folder and copied soemthing... lol

[willy_ph]

The judge recognized that the availability of copyrighted files isn't necessarily indicative of copyright infringement. In otherwords, the availability of copyrighted material is necessary to prove copyright infringement, but not sufficient to be the basis of such a conviction. Thus, the judge has established that the requirement of proof had not been met by CRIA.

Oh I get it. I didn't give it to anyone, they just came into my shared folder and copied soemthing...

It doesn't even have anything to do with the copying part. The judge merely established that the proof did not exist to justify the claim that they were guilty of copyright infringement. From the fact that materials were made available, CRIA argued that this availability could be seen as evidence of copyright infringement. However, the judge realized that the mere availability of materials is not indicative of copyright infringement.

Here's an analogy to better understand the argument (albeit a bad one). Suppose you're in a store, and you're a minor. Obviously you can see cigarettes, but you cannot legally purchase them. CRIA's argument in this situation would be that the fact that they are available is evidence that cigarettes were purchased by minors, even though there is no proof to support the claim.

[butch81385]

doesnt the riaa (and i assume the cria) have to download a file from you to verify what you are uploading? should they not also get sued since supposedly no one has the right to keep an alternate digital form of the music except the artist?