In the past I’ve used the book chapter: Copyright Liability and Music ‘Piracy’: Capitol Records v Thomas-Rasset from the book Intellectual Property Excesses as a citation in one of my papers on piracy. It’s a United States case that found Thomas based on copyright infringement of 24 songs to be liable for $200.000, $1.92 million, $1.5 million and finally returning to $222.000. It is a case that exemplifies the massive amount of damages that have been found against someone for piracy.
In contrast to this older United States case, I have a recent article from the Toronto Star also in pdf form bellow for your viewing pleasure that outlines how a Canadian lawyer (Ken Clark) works around Canada’s notice-and-notice regime. A system that hides users identity and prevents blackmail settlement offers being forwarded to alleged pirates. However, there is a process for a rights holder to go through the system with a Norwhich order case to find the owner of an internet connection and sue them (often with the intention of settling as per what Ken Clark practices). Rogers Communications Inc. v. Voltage Pictures [24] best explains this process.
My presentation tackles the effectiveness of Canada’s notice-and-notice regime in light of actors such as Ken Clark, the liability of those that are part of the piracy process (touching on international figures) and if this anti-piracy system is effective while serving a proper purpose.
Samuel Honer