Downloaders beware: Life after Bill C-11
Changes to the Copyright Modernization
Act, also known as Bill
C-11, took effect on January 1,
requiring that Internet service providers
forward notices from rightsholders
to people accused of infringing
copyrighted materials.
The notices will include the Internet Protocol address and details of the alleged infringement, such as the date and time the crime was committed.
However, the personal information of customers accused of infringing copyrighted materials, such as downloading movies and music on the Internet, will not be shared with the rightsholders.
The notices also do not carry fines or penalties, but rightsholders are allowed to sue users who they believe are guilty of infringement for personal use for up to $5,000. They are allowed to sue users who infringed copyrighted materials for commercial gains for up to $20,000. ISPs have to keep the information about the alleged infringement for six months in case rightsholders decide to sue.
It is unlikely that copyright holders will sue, but it is a possibility, said Michael Geist, the Canada research chair in Internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa.
“It’s up to rightsholder,” he said. “But it’s not a lot of money to generate even potential cost.”
Last year, however, the American production company Voltage Pictures acquired the names and addresses of about 2,000 TekSavvy customers who allegedly downloaded its films on Internet. Voltage Pictures produced films such as Dallas Buyers Club and The Hurt Locker.
“They’ve been trying to obtain a couple of thousand IP addresses in the expectation that they’re hoping to settle for a few thousand dollars,” Geist said.
While ISPs have been forwarding notices from rightsholders to copyright infringers informally for about a decade, ISPs are now subject to penalties if they fail to do so.
“In many instances, at least in the past, we’ve seen the system was pretty effective in part because some people aren’t aware of the law, and they’re not aware that people can even see that that IP address is in engaged in that activity,” Geist said. “So their behaviour changes in part because from an awareness perspective, they’re not more aware what the law is and potential penalties if they don’t comply with it.”
In a 2014 blogpost, Geist wrote that Rogers Communications Inc. told a House of Commons committee in 2011 that 67 per cent of users who received a notice stopped infringing copyrighted material. After a second notice, 89 per cent of users stopped doing so.
The notices will include the Internet Protocol address and details of the alleged infringement, such as the date and time the crime was committed.
However, the personal information of customers accused of infringing copyrighted materials, such as downloading movies and music on the Internet, will not be shared with the rightsholders.
The notices also do not carry fines or penalties, but rightsholders are allowed to sue users who they believe are guilty of infringement for personal use for up to $5,000. They are allowed to sue users who infringed copyrighted materials for commercial gains for up to $20,000. ISPs have to keep the information about the alleged infringement for six months in case rightsholders decide to sue.
It is unlikely that copyright holders will sue, but it is a possibility, said Michael Geist, the Canada research chair in Internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa.
“It’s up to rightsholder,” he said. “But it’s not a lot of money to generate even potential cost.”
Last year, however, the American production company Voltage Pictures acquired the names and addresses of about 2,000 TekSavvy customers who allegedly downloaded its films on Internet. Voltage Pictures produced films such as Dallas Buyers Club and The Hurt Locker.
“They’ve been trying to obtain a couple of thousand IP addresses in the expectation that they’re hoping to settle for a few thousand dollars,” Geist said.
While ISPs have been forwarding notices from rightsholders to copyright infringers informally for about a decade, ISPs are now subject to penalties if they fail to do so.
“In many instances, at least in the past, we’ve seen the system was pretty effective in part because some people aren’t aware of the law, and they’re not aware that people can even see that that IP address is in engaged in that activity,” Geist said. “So their behaviour changes in part because from an awareness perspective, they’re not more aware what the law is and potential penalties if they don’t comply with it.”
In a 2014 blogpost, Geist wrote that Rogers Communications Inc. told a House of Commons committee in 2011 that 67 per cent of users who received a notice stopped infringing copyrighted material. After a second notice, 89 per cent of users stopped doing so.
