Hi, I was just wondering how does a movie site gets shut down, for example tv-links.co.uk? do they give a warning first thats asks them to remove it? or they just arrest and shut down right away? and please talk from the Canadian laws point of view. Thanks, SP360
Each situation can be different. If you have infringing content, the copyright holder is under no obligation to notify you first. However, the courts look more favorably on those that try to work things out without the court's intervention first. It is hard to talk about tv-links from the Canadian stand point since the whole thing was in the UK, but another example that was in Canada was Demonoid. They were shut down because the CRIA threatened the hosting company for the site. The host decided to shut the site down rather than face possible court proceedings. Copyright holders can come after you, your host, and even the ISP. They can do so with or without notification, well they can come after the site owner without notification. It would be hard to come after a host or the ISP without at least some initial contact showing that the host or ISP was aware of the activity and refused to do anything about it. They can use the civil courts and in some cases they can use the criminal courts. Or they might just send you a bill like Getty Images did to so many sites. Those are the possibilities, but here is the reality: Most small copyright holders will contact the site owner first. In most cases they wouldn't recover enough money if they went to court. Now if they contact you and you refuse to do anything about it then they might go to your host or they might take you to court. If they contacted you first and you refused to do anything about it they are much more likely to get statutory damages which could very easily cover court costs (assuming you have the money to pay the award, of course). Large copyright holders usually either contact you first or they contact the host first. The reason they often go to the host first is for two reasons. One, hosts tend to be much more compliant. If they do not respond then the host becomes legally complicit and therefore liable for the infringement so hosts tend to be much more responsive than site owners. Two, hosts are more likely to actually have money than most site owners (though a site as popular as tv-links may have plenty of money, or not). It also will depend on the site itself. Small sites usually have the owner contacted first as they are easier to scare usually. With a big site it might be more likely that the host is contacted first, especially if the site seems to have an anti-authority slant (a piratebay as opposed to a youtube). But usually is not always. The law does not demand that copyright holders take a specific path to the courts. They may start there first. Sometimes that happens because the copyright holder wants to make it known that they will come after infringers.
so even if im only linking to movies and shows and not hosting ANYTHING thats copyrighted, i can still be in trouble?
Yes, linking to infringing material is considered to be just as illegal as hosting it. I'm not sure if that is the case in Canada yet, but they seem to be moving in that direction.
99% of the time, the site owner is contacted. You are given a list of what you have to remove and why. Typically with a 24-48 hour deadline, and demand you not repost it ever. You comply, and that is the end of it. However, if they wanted to get nasty, or make an example of you, or you taunt them like piratebay. You will stir up a hornet's nest, and they will go after you, your host, your billing ,etc etc. DMCA you to search engines, and possibly seek damages IF they can prove it. Everyone forgets the IF THEY CAN PROVE DAMAGES in these types of threads. Best to comply to their demands.
Oh ok, thanks for the info. Anyone knows where i can check the Canadian laws online some where? and see if linking is illegal in Canada too.
Yeah. That doesn't happen. It could, but again. Anything like that is the exception. Not the rule, or the norm. I've been through this on BOTH sides of the issue. So I speak from experience. Not simply hypothesizing as an "internet esquire". 2 cents.