🚀 go-pugleaf

A couple of corrections are needed here, one being that one should not state
that I stated/proved something specific.  At no time did I state that no
criminal offence was committed.  (I will get back to that).

As for "acting in good faith", that was my error.  I tried to paraphrase,
but it looks like I used the wrong choice of words, Quote - R.S.C. 1985, c.
C-42 (Copyright Act) Section 38. (2) Where a copyright owner has made an
election under subsection (1) and the defendant satisfies the court that the
defendant was not aware and had no reasonable grounds to believe that the
defendant had infringed copyright, the court may reduce the amount of the
award to less than $500, but not less than $200.

Now on to criminal offence.  The Criminal Records Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-47
clearly defines what is a criminal offence (by way of stating eligibilities
for a Pardon of a Criminal Record), that being any offence found (with
certain exceptions, not one of which is the Copyright Act) in any Federal
Statute or Regulation. Note that it does not limit Criminal Offences to just
offences embodied within the Criminal Code.

As to whether or not the police would become involved, to that I can only
say that the R.C.M.P. is mandated to enforce the provisions of the Copyright
Act.  This can be initiated upon complaint from either the copyright owner
or from another agency as a request for assistance (read F.B.I.), in
addition to the normal course of business, whereby discoveries of possible
offences are made.  The answer, to most all the questions posed by "Gutz",
is it is possible; with regard to grounds for Search Warrant, one may only
have to produce the logs from the ISP.  Now before you argue manpower,
budgets, time better spent, etc. I am not contributing to those arguments, I
am only stating the possibilities, whether they may occur or not.

One has to read the Copyright Act, specifically concentrating on definitions
(plate, ie - appliance, ie - computer hard drive), infringement of
copyright, copyright owner, offences and penalties, possession of plates,
etc.

One can also attempt to justify, rationalize or try to support their
position on a moral basis. However that still does not change the
possibilities and I for one would not want to be the person to test the
powers of the court for a $7.00 movie.

Now I may have missed something posted earlier or since.  I see this was
cross posted by Peter D to Can. Legal, thus assuming he was looking for some
form of confirmation of his position.  It would appear that he has not
received that confirmation.  What he intends to do with it is his decision.
My opinions are just that, take them or leave them. :-)

"gutz" <winnipeg_don@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8k8uoug6se5uqior37d225kk5ul7hdnnu4@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 13:50:27 GMT, "Unikrom!" <Unikrom@Not_Hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Thank you NEWS
>
> Well, NEWS did prove that d/ling the movies is not a criminal offense.
> I believe that is what Peter was stating. He is doing nothing
> criminal.
> >
> >
> >"NEWS" <wromop@newwws.net> wrote in message
news:3d8ee9fd$1@news.eol.ca...
> >> As signatories to the WTO after January 1, 1996 Canada recognizes
> >copyrights
> >> that were registered or presumed to be covered by the laws of the
U.S.A.
> >> (You did not expect any company that holds the copyright to list each
and
> >> every country that recognizes their rights, now do you). It is quite
easy
> >> for even one performer in a movie to prove copyright infringement.
> >>
> >> You are right in that it is not covered by the Criminal Code of Canada,
> >> however you are acting like an ostrich with its head in the sand if you
> >> believe you have not violated any laws.  Try the Copyright Act ( R.S.
> >1985,
> >> c. C-42 ), which provides excessive penalties to cover loss of revenue
and
> >> punitive damages that start at $200.00.  That starting fine is only if
you
> >> can prove to the courts that you were acting in good faith. :-).
>
> As these movies come down the pipe in many parts.........not one big
> file......one may argue ( in good faith ) that they thought it was a
> trailer........
>
> Is any police force going to come and take away your hard drive to
> prove that you have mp3's or movies on them? Are they going to search
> your domicile for burned copies of such items? On what grounds are
> they going to get a warrant? You expect a judge to issue a warrant
> based on what was said on Usenet????
>