BMG Canada Inc v Doe: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''BMG Canada Inc. and others v. Doe and others''' is an important Canadian [[copyright]] law, file-sharing, and privacy case, where an [[Ontario]] Court refused to allow the the [[Canadian Recording Industry Association]] and several major record labels from obtaining the subscriber information of [[internet service provider]] customers alleged to have been infringing copyright. Judgment was delivered [[31 March] [[2004]], in Toronto, Ontario. |
'''BMG Canada Inc. and others v. Doe and others''' is an important Canadian [[copyright]] law, file-sharing, and privacy case, where an [[Ontario]] Court refused to allow the the [[Canadian Recording Industry Association]] and several major record labels from obtaining the subscriber information of [[internet service provider]] customers alleged to have been infringing copyright. Judgment was delivered [[31 March]] [[2004]], in Toronto, Ontario. |
||
The appeal court upheld the core finding of the previous case, that the identities should not be revealed to the plaintiffs, while lowering the test required in this kind of case and also saying that the lower court erred by ruling on whether the alleged filesharing was actually copyright infringement. Judgement was delivered [[19 May]] [[2005]]. |
The appeal court upheld the core finding of the previous case, that the identities should not be revealed to the plaintiffs, while lowering the test required in this kind of case and also saying that the lower court erred by ruling on whether the alleged filesharing was actually copyright infringement. Judgement was delivered [[19 May]] [[2005]]. |
||
Revision as of 17:25, 20 May 2005
BMG Canada Inc. and others v. Doe and others is an important Canadian copyright law, file-sharing, and privacy case, where an Ontario Court refused to allow the the Canadian Recording Industry Association and several major record labels from obtaining the subscriber information of internet service provider customers alleged to have been infringing copyright. Judgment was delivered 31 March 2004, in Toronto, Ontario.
The appeal court upheld the core finding of the previous case, that the identities should not be revealed to the plaintiffs, while lowering the test required in this kind of case and also saying that the lower court erred by ruling on whether the alleged filesharing was actually copyright infringement. Judgement was delivered 19 May 2005.
Citation: BMG Canada Inc. v. John Doe, 2005 FCA 193