One type of media gets the (government) goldmine, the other gets the shaft.
Blacklocks- Password Sharing OK: Judge
“There is a significant public interest in reading articles with a view to protecting the public and the press against errors and omissions,” wrote the Court. Federal lawyers in the case justified password sharing under the guise of fact-checking. No errors or omissions in Blacklock’s stories were cited.
Blacklock’s caught Parks Canada managers circulating a single password by email. “The Court accepts that Parks Canada was subject to Blacklock’s terms,” said Barry Sookman, senior counsel with McCarthy Tetrault LLP
Records showed Manager Patenaude shared the password with at least nine others and offered it to anyone who asked.
Michael Geist- Huge Win for Copyright User Rights in Canada: Federal Court Rules Digital Lock Rules Do Not Trump Fair Dealing
Blacklock’s position on this issue was straightforward: it argued that its content was protected by a password, that passwords constituted a form of technological protection measure, and that fair dealing does not apply in the context of circumvention. In other words, it argued that the act of circumvention (in this case of a password) was itself infringing and it could not be saved by fair dealing.
The Federal Court disagreed on all points. It cited with approval CIPPIC’s argument that “the TPM provisions do not apply to restrain fair dealing; using a validly obtained password to access content is not circumvention.” Further, court noted “how the password was obtained is significant as this may prevent a user from invoking the fair dealing provisions of the Act.” In other words, not all password sharing will qualify as fair dealing. This decision is not a licence to simply share passwords with no consequences, but rather affirmation that passwords are not a technological protection measure and that using validly obtained password does not limit fair dealing rights.
So smalldeadanimals could get one subscription to each media outlet that has paywalls, and just distribute the passwords to all subscribers? Or does this ruling only apply to government employees who are to dense to understand the entire purpose of a password is to restrict access?
Or even better…could Blacklocks publish all this information?
As long as one person subscribes, it’s free for everyone right?
Same with things like netflix sharing…
The Judge is willfully or maliciously stupid.
If I buy 1 Toronto Star at the local store can I walk out with another 9?
You need that much toilet paper?
And how does this work with say the CSA? Asking for a friend.
I bought my Plumbing and Gasfitting code books on eBay for about 25% of the CSA retail price, and on a couple of the pages there are outlines from previous users, which is fine with me. I know people who have done the same with the Canadian Electrical Code books, and as it’s considered “gov’t law” I’m sure there shouldn’t be a cost to know what the law is…. so I don’t care if the entire country cheats the CSA out of sales.
Private ownership is different… the private sector can’t simply “make up a new law” to fund their never ending thirst for income, they need to actually go out there and create something worth buying.
I almost think that the #Librano judge in this case, or for any other judicial decisions in this regard are well schooled in knowing the likes of Blacklocks are forever pointing out the failure of Canadian governance in general, the lack of integrity within gov’t, and their never-ending thirst for spending more of your tax dollars. For this, the gov’t cannot just sit there and allow the private sector to point fun at them, so this is what they’ve decided to do.
The one item the gov’t CANNOT TOLERATE is ridicule. This is lesson #12,254 in an ongoing series
I think it’s an important question to ask, would this decision have been the same if it was a password which had been shared to access one of the federal governments’s heavily welfare dependent media outlets.
Like the Globe and Mail or TorStar for example…
“The Judge is willfully or maliciously stupid.”
So lets say the judge bought a car on his own.
Does that mean I get my own keys so I can use it whenever I want?
So is the argument here that “Parks Canada” subscribed to Blacklocks as a corporate entity, and therefore anyone acting on behalf of Parks Canada is entitled to use the subscription? My company will have to remember that when subscribing to MS or Adobe products.
RNrn
Must be Monday in Canada.
So it comes down to that fundamental definition of what is, “is”. Seems it can be whatever one wants it to be. Always convenient for demoncrats, Lieberals, socialists and thieves.
If one sold cookies, would they have to give a cookie to everyone, if one person paid for their cookie?
This does not wash.
They’re anti business and pro cbc. Anyone better than cbc must not exist.
That’s one more line drawn.
MFA. Make them use two systems… password and an authentication app or email… Will stop this BS in its tracks. MFA is a technological protection mechanism. Easy, done!
please elaborate.
One person using 2 systems?
What keeps them from cheating?
(it won’t be because of integrity.)
When you log in with a password, you have to either get a code from an email from the site, which only goes to the original address that goes with the password, or a code from another program, which is specific to 1 device (typically a phone).
The net effect of this is the originator will constantly get requests for the code from other people who want to use the same password.
Re: “Justice Roy ruled Blacklock’s terms and conditions though “plainly visible” were irrelevant and the email notices too bewildering for Parks Canada management to comprehend. “What is an ‘institutional subscriber’ other than a subscriber who happens to be an institution of some sort? he wrote. “What is a ‘bulk subscription’? What constitutes ‘distribution’ or ‘share’?”
That statement doesn’t say much about the intellectual ability of Parks Canada. Then again, this is the organization that closed down the Glen Rouge campground in Toronto in late 2019 for improvements. We are now into year five with no park opening on the horizon.
doesn’t say much about the judge either.
“The Government Can Steal Your Stuff”
It is important to note that in this case “your stuff” only exists by government grant of priviledge in the first place, who thus controls the terms of ownership. Unlike physical property, intellectual property has no existence in natural law.
Why aren’t news and information collections, that can be verified, that require time, money and human effort to gather, verify and gain appropriate permissions, a good like any other printed or electronically circulated good?
When you buy a newspaper, you can lend it or give it to anyone you like.
Why can’t I do that with electronic media I buy?
If buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing.
And, in fact, it isn’t. It is violating a right of privilege, which is legally something very different from theft.
Equating it with theft is propaganda.
“Equating it with theft is propaganda.”
I see what you did there.
So, I can share my newspaper with 100 people, but that’s OK because its serial sharing and not parallel sharing.
I think it’s you people who are rationalizing.
I also think you’re a bunch of shills for Hollywood and the MPIAA and DMCA.
Oh, and W & L, your assumption that I’m a millennial is the height of hypocrisy, unless you are actually retarded, given your posting history.
If you buy a physical newspaper and give or lend it to someone else, *you* no longer have access to that copy for as long as it is not in your possession. If you pay for a password to a paywall article and tell someone else the password, you still have access at the same time as anyone you gave the password to. There is a difference.
If you copy a newspaper you have not deprived anybody of a newspaper, you have become a producer of newspapers.
In the analogy of Thomas Jefferson (who opposed copyright in a free society), lighting one candle from another does not deprive anybody of light, it spreads light to the world.
sooooo YW, rationalizing again?
the fact you GAVE UP the PRINTED paper means you no longer have access.
copying stuff via d/l is NOT the ‘same thing’.
go ahead millenial. rationalize all of it to the point there is NO POINT in producing ANYTHING it just gets copied up the wazoo with blessings from liberals
I can share my newspaper with 100 people, but that’s OK because its serial sharing and not parallel sharing.
I think it’s you people who are rationalizing.
I also think you’re a bunch of shills for Hollywood and the MPIAA and DMCA.
Oh, and W & L, your assumption that I’m a millennial is the height of hypocrisy, unless you are actually retarded, given your posting history.
That is true, however some IP needs legal protection under the law, otherwise innovation would would not be incentivized.
Yes, but if you tie your investment to that, you are at the mercy of that.
I think AnCap free-market resolutions would work, with various arbitration companies hashing things out on a case-by-case basis, instead of this “one size screws all” system we are currently living under.
“Some”.
Yeah, I hate to break it to you but IP laws are how a society decides which IP falls under “some”.
So a site’s Terms of Service, TOS, isn’t worth the paper it’s written on, in Canada.
Anyone have Netflix, Photoshop, TorStar (for the laughs) passwords?
Asking for a lot of friends.
judgey judges seem bent on coming up with bizarrely intricate and complex rulings with extremely and highly refined interpretations like expanding some 1 in 20,000 odds of an event happening and basing a ruling to cover that and not the other 19,999 occurrences.
only in CanaDUH where our judgey judges need only be a childhood acquaintance to get the iron rice bowl.
Librano judges licking Librano government bags. Where’s the problem or surprise?
Try getting into a national park campground without paying for the park entrance fee, site fee, etc.
Hey, what’s the secret password?
Winkin, blinkin, Nod
Pass the password word
What about sharing with https://archive.is ???
Is that OK?
Should archive.com be shut down?
Blacklocks editor has lobbied to deny Sun Media’s Parliamentary Press Gallery credentials.
Nobody bought a newspaper ffs.
You bought a subscription that clearly states, as part of the contract, that you can’t share it.
So basically if Judge Corrupt wrote a book he’d have no copyright law by his own admission.
Plus he’s an idiot.
So, what you’re telling me is that “Indian Giver” was really a neologism and that we should have been saying “Government Giver” all along?
Mind blown.
a certain tribe has been paid for the same piece of land 3 times so far, so they might have been doing it a bit longer that the canadian government.
I have to elaborate on the topic “the government can and will steal everything”.
I served in the RCN/CAF for 13yrs, 10months and 2 days.
My last contract (1971) was for an indefinite period with a 6 month clause. Both ways.
I gave them notice of leaving 9 Nov 1976.
Final realize date was 24 June 1977. Do the math this is honest gov of Canada.
I by contract was entitled to rehab leave of 1Month per 5 yrs. = aprox 2&2/3 months.
They asked me at the last minute, and I mean I literally had 1 foot out the door, if I would take 13 weeks severance as opposed to rehab leave.
Like a fool I said yes and Pierre the Turd and company stole 1/2 of the severance.
This makes the gov of Canada a THIEF.
Do you know what happens if you die before collecting your CPP pension? all your “contributions” get stolen by the government to be mismanaged.
Does this rule apply for bank account access? Netflix?
Frozen accounts ? Yes.
Smooth brained liberals cannot comprehend cause and effect.
Their shallow one dimensional minds don’t work that way.