Downloading music is legal in Canada
 

Canadians, download away!

http://www.tandemnews.com/viewstory.php?storyid=3839

Music downloading legal in Canada
Industry and critics up in arms as judge rules that peer-to-peer users doing nothing wrong
By Alessandro Cancian
Originally Published: 2004-04-11

And so, while the French, British and U.S. recording industry announced new legal attacks on peer-to-peer users for the coming weeks, their Canadian sister will be forced to think twice.

In the land of the maple leaf, in fact, a federal judge ruled last week that sharing copyrighted works on peer-to-peer networks is legal. The ruling was hard to swallow for recording companies that had already been forced to review their plans.

In December, in fact, the Copyright Board of Canada (http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/), which handles intellectual property rights, established that, based on Canadian Law or loopholes thereof, downloading music, movies and other copyrighted material was legal.

The regulators cited a long-standing rule in Canada, in which most copying for personal use was allowed. To repay artists and record labels for revenue lost by this activity, the government imposes a fee on blank tapes, CDs and even hard disk-based MP3 players such as Apple Computer's iPod, and distributes that revenue to copyright holders.

Secretary General Claude Majeau's remarks were tough to accept for the majors, despite the clarification that the Board considered uploading to be illegal; they elicited a storm of controversy from the Canadian Recording Industry Association.

CRIA General Councillor Richard Pfohl dismissed the remarks of the Copyright Board, trusting judges to "confirm the illegality of downloading".

Apparently, the judge shared the opinion of the Copyright Board.
Canadian record labels had asked the court for authorization to identify 29 alleged file swappers in the country, in preparation for suing them for copyright infringement. But the judge denied that request. In a far-ranging decision, the court further found that both downloading music and putting it in a shared folder available to other people online appeared to be legal in Canada.

This ruling all but prevents the majors from getting any Canadian p2p user convicted. What is most striking about this ruling is that the judge declared legal not just the downloading of music but also the sharing of any quantity of files.

This first ruling will certainly be appealed, as the local recording industry has immediately declared its displeasure.

Canada, despite heavy pressuring from the industry, never passed its version of the DMCA or EUCD, the draconian copyright laws enacted by the United States and the European Union, and interpretation of the law can lead to surprises.

The ruling was based on the judge's finding that CRIA had not managed to prove the alleged violations. But he also questioned whether CRIA had a copyright case at all.

The judge accepted the Copyright Board's early decision almost without comment, but he went further, citing a recent Supreme Court decision to say that making music available online also appeared to be legal.

In that recent case, the Supreme Court ruled that libraries were not "authorizing" copyright infringement simply by putting photocopy machines near books. The libraries were justified in assuming that their customers were using the copiers in a legal manner, the high court ruled.

The judge said the same rationale should apply to peer-to-peer users because, before it will be illegal, there must be a positive act by the owner of the shared directory.

So up until you don't advertise your shared files you can still sleep and dream.

:tear - My Heart Will Go On - Céline Dion

I don't bother anymore for the fact that Kazaa and other sites have so many songs that are poor quality or only half of the song is there or it's a virus. I don't even think I would pay a site like Puretracks for songs because it has to be degraded by the time it gets to you burner.

You're not getting virii from your MP3s, retard.

This decision was predicted long ago, but it will get appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, so we'll have to wait until then for the final word.

In the meantime, I will enjoy making legal copies of music for my own private use. :)

anything you download is a potential virus :/

You dumasses still waste your time with Mp3s?

MP3s no longer cool, Bobo?

What are all the hip kids listening to then?



I miss Chris Becker, the true Bobo Adobo. :(

Mp3s are shitty shitty shitty qual-itty.

.SHN and .Flac

Now thats were its at!

I am the reall Bobo Adobo, you buffoon. Chris Pecker can kiss it!

& what are the file sizes on those?

Or the program support?

& if I wanted to be talking about using them for FM broadcast, is the high quality really needed?

Oops, this isn't the tech forum is it. :lol

You can play flac and SHNs on WINamp. You need a special patch for WINamp to play SHN. But the newest version of WINamp plays .flac.

Theres all kinds of programs that convert them to .wav files

File sizes are a larger. but not significantly.

High quality isn't really needed for Radio, but some of us take pride in our music collection. :) And aren't retarded enough to listen to the radio.

Shut up, commie :(

"Bobo" is a dipshit. The human ear can't distinguish higher sample rates than what is possible with MP3 audio. You're fooling yourself if you think otherwise, just like those morons who still insist that vinyl sounds better than digital.

Fartin is also a dipshit. While any file may contain virus instructions, only an executable or batch file can act as a virus. (i.e. a Windows shortcut file or .PIF, and .EXE, a .BAT, or whatever a .SCR is)

"Perndog" wouldn't know "sound quality" if it stuck it's "dick" in his "ass". You would have to be a complete "dumass" if you can't tell the "Difference" after you convert a "wav" file to a "mp3" file you "dipshit". Converting .wavs to shns is a lossless conversion, something you can't do with mp3s. Just because your tonedeaf ass can't hear it, doesn't mean anybody else can't,

There is a reason that bands sometimes charge more for recording downloads that are .flac files, you "douche".

Quoting makes you sound so much clever. :/

When i start seeing people sharing lots and lots of .flac files, i might switch. But otherwise, there's no difference and you know it, you hipster penis.

And last time i heard, there was some sort of virus running around on apple computers that was hiding in MP3 files, or something. O .o

Sharingthegroove.org, shares mostly .flac and shn files. I can tell the difference, I must have some dillusional disorder. :/

Most good Bootleggers can't stand trading Mp3s, because they thrive on sound quality. They chose SHNs and FLacs because they are lossless conversions.

No one shares .flacs on p2p networks because they don't take 30 seconds to download.

Yeah, there is a reason bands charge more for different file types. Because wannabe audiophiles like yourself will pay more and the bands know it.

Don't give me this shit about sound quality, I work in a mastering studio.

You also listen to shitty music. And I don't pay for live recordings. :)

Don't give me shit about sound wuality I work in a mastering studio. :die

You don't even know what kind of music I listen to (or record), you pretentious dick.

EDIT: Oh yeah, you probably don't know what mastering is or how it's done. I'll stick to simpler arguments from now on.

"Pretencious", If I only had a dollar for the amount of times people have misused that word on this board. :/

If only I had a dollar for every idiot who couldn't spell "pretentious." Or understand when it's being used correctly.

There's something awfully ironic about correcting someone and fucking up your own post at the same time. Not to mention bitching at someone for picking on spelling right after you tried to pick on his grammar.

If I only had a dollar for every time a person points out someones spelling because they have nothing clever to say.

if only i had a dollar whenever people threw insults at eachother.


... if only I had a dollar when some pointless halfbaked retard came out of nowhere to make a lame joke!

Pretentious - Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified.

Hmmm.. that actually sounds alot more like....

You!

You think you know about sound quality, because you work in a mastering studio. But you haven't posted any of your recordings. Its also possible for bad recordings to come out of studio.

But you know by now that I mostly post on the music board. I see what bands you comment on, and based on that I assume you shitty musical taste, Its all subjective. But not pretentious. According to my standards, your music sucks.

I can tell the difference between an mp3 and a .flac, my faculties of auditory perception are better than yours.

EDIT: More honed sounds gay. :(