Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Software Businesses Canada Communications The Almighty Buck The Courts The Internet

Cable Giants Step Up Piracy Battle By Interrogating Montreal Software Developer (www.cbc.ca) 185

Posted by BeauHD from the horrifying-experiences dept.
New submitter wierzpio writes: In more news about TVAddons, Canadian cable companies used a civil search warrant to visit the owner and developer of TVAddons, a library of hundreds of apps known as add-ons that allow people easy access to pirated movies, TV shows, and live TV. According to Adam Lackman, founder of TVAddons and defendant in the copyright lawsuit launched by the television giants, "The whole experience was horrifying. It felt like the kind of thing you would have expected to have happened in the Soviet Union." During the 16 hour-long visit, he was interrogated, denied the right not to answer the questions, and denied the right to consult his answers with his lawyer, who was present. His personal possessions were seized. Adam is fighting back (link to Indiegogo fundraising page) and already the judge declared the search warrant "null and void." "I am of the view that its true purpose was to destroy the livelihood of the defendant, deny him the financial resources to finance a defense to the claim made against him," the judge wrote. "The defendant has demonstrated that he has an arguable case that he is not violating the [Copyright] Act," the judge continued, adding that by the plaintiffs' own estimate, only about one per cent of Lackman's add-ons were allegedly used to pirate content. Lackman's belongings still haven't been returned, and he can't acess the TVAddons website or its social media accounts, which were also seized. "Bell, Rogers and Videotron has appealed the court decision and a Federal Court of Appeal judge has ruled that until the appeal can be hard, Lackman will get nothing back," reports cbc.ca.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cable Giants Step Up Piracy Battle By Interrogating Montreal Software Developer More

Cable Giants Step Up Piracy Battle By Interrogating Montreal Software Developer

Comments Filter:

  • This is absolutely... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chris Katko ( 2923353 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @05:44PM (#54929527)

    ...disturbing.

    Like... what the hell is going on in Canada? And how long are Canadians going to stand around before they burn the place down and put this thing called a reasonable "Bill of Rights" into their constitution.

    Because it's pure insanity to allow a party to directly inspect a defendant's property (as opposed to having the police / third-party investigator do it).

    For every attack people put on the USA (and many are warranted), I look over at the UK and Canada and watch back in horror as their civil liberties are worth less than the paper they aren't printed on.

    • Re:This is absolutely... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @05:54PM (#54929593)

      Why the rant against Canada?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Bill_of_Rights

      This private action by Canadian Cable companies is atrocious, and it violates Canadian law as reported by the judge in this case. The victim was illegally interrogated and his assets seized in violation of what the law permits.

      Yes this was a terrible thing, but this isn't happening because Canada has lax rights laws. What the hell is going on in Canada? Asshole companies are being assholes, just like asshole companies worldwide.

      • Re:This is absolutely... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Rick Schumann ( 4662797 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @06:09PM (#54929681) Journal

        The victim was illegally interrogated and his assets seized in violation of what the law permits

        What was the most disturbing about this is how it says he was 'denied the right to not answer questions'; how, pray tell, do they 'deny' him that? From the original article:

        Lackman was "not permitted to refuse to answer questions" and his lawyer wasn't permitted to counsel him in his answers. "Any time I would question the process, they would threaten me with contempt of court proceedings," says Lackman.

        Absolute fucking bullshit.

        • In the US, that is the point where your lawyer would interrupt and tell them he'll happily see them in court, because there's no way that any competent judge would hold him in contempt of court.

          Why is it so different in Canada?

          • In the US, that is the point where your lawyer would interrupt and tell them he'll happily see them in court, because there's no way that any competent judge would hold him in contempt of court.

            Why is it so different in Canada?

            Because the US has a Constitution that includes (as part of the Fifth Amendment) a protection against self-incrimination. That's where the right to say nothing and not be penalized for it goes from a claim of natural rights to an integral part of the legal system.

            Canada's legal syste

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by ArmoredDragon ( 3450605 )

              Apparently in Canadian law, if it's a civil discovery, you can be compelled to provide evidence, which means that protections against self-incrimination only work in criminal cases. Where it gets complicated is that this may or may not be used against you in a criminal case, in addition to the civil case.

              https://www.bennettjones.com/P... [bennettjones.com]

              Honestly I'd be a little on edge in Canada in general, or at least in Toronto anyways. There are actual undercover PC police that listen for anybody making comments or light

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by rastos1 ( 601318 )

              the right to say nothing and not be penalized for it

              Is the bold part actually true? If the interrogator says: "if you don't speak, we will pursue a harsher sentence" - isn't that a common scenario?

              • Not in the US. A sentence would be a possible outcome of a criminal case, where the Supreme Court has been very clear. That's why we have Miranda declarations ("You have the right to remain silent", etc.). Testimony gets excluded quickly if it's found to be procured in violation of tha right.

                In a civil case like this one, the finder of fact (jury if you use one, otherwise the trial judge) may make what is called an "adverse inference" if one party asserts his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. He c

            • Independent of that, in the US it would be a gross breach of ethics (and maybe the law? I'm not sure) for any lawyer to try to communicate directly with a party once they have been informed that that party has retained counsel, in large part to prevent exactly this kind of illegal bullying. Do Canadian lawyers not have any similar ethics rule?

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Unless it was a court and a judge had issued the ruling, I would have ignored them and kept asking my solicitor.

          And any attempt to arrest without cause is merely kidnap and assault.

        • "Any time I would question the process, they would threaten me with contempt of court proceedings," says Lackman.

          Fine. I actually am in contempt of the court so you probably should find me in contempt. I will not be treated this way.

          Fortunately, it wasn't me but that would have been my attitude. I would keep escalating until it became a full-blown terrorist campaign, burning down courthouses, shooting government officials, etc. The government almost always wins but it is important to stand up for yourself anyways.

      • Obviously the Canadian Bill of Rights is worth about as much as toilet paper considering this action.

      • Re:This is absolutely... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @06:12PM (#54929701) Journal

        The victim was illegally interrogated and his assets seized in violation of what the law permits.

        Shit happens sometimes... Law enforcement and prosecutors overstep their bounds, and are set straight by a judge. What really boggles the mind in this case is that the seized property wasn't returned pending the appeal, as the search warrant was rules "null and void". I would have at least expected a court of appeals to rule that his stuff is returned pending the appeal, unless the prosecutor can make a damn convincing argument that they need his stuff to make their case. And given the extent to which his rights were violated, the appeals court would probably do well to uphold the original verdict.

        • What really boggles the mind in this case is that the seized property wasn't returned pending the appeal

          Keeping the materials is the only way to guarantee they'll still exist if the appellate court reverses the trial court and holds the search warrant was proper.

          • Digital evidence can be copied and checksummed. No reason to hold onto it other than because they can get away with it.

      • Why the rant against Canada?

        Asshole companies being assholes most certainly, but there is justification for blaming Canada here. We're talking about a country that has speech codes like the ones on American liberal arts campuses, but applying to the whole country. You can be hauled before a secret tribunal for criticizing religious practices or even a public figure's arrest record:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        or a list of other parameters which is continually being expanded:

        http://www.theblaze.com/news/2... [theblaze.com]

        These categories of "hat

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Minupla ( 62455 )

          secret tribunal

          I think that's overstating it a bit. As can be seen by following your first link, the findings of the tribunal are public (unlike the national security ones on either side of the border, which I'll grant you, are egregious, although at least on the CND side, they've been getting a bit more transparent, ( http://ca.reuters.com/article/... [reuters.com] ). We'll see how it works out.

          On a personal note, I don't mind the CND hate speech laws. In cases where I've had the stomach to review the actual objectionable material

        • Just a matter of time before the US has to invade Canada and liberate them from their "dictatorship of virtue" to restore basic human rights... Assuming the US can survive a similar onslaught by the fascist progressives.

          • Assuming the US can survive a similar onslaught by the fascist assholes like LeftCoastThinker.

            FTFY.

            • Nice, but being obscene or emotional doesn't validate your position or make you right, it only re-enforces my opinion that lefties by and large are emotional idiots who believe whatever pile of crap the alt left media and the Democrats feed them regardless of reality.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by skam240 ( 789197 )

                You're retarded. You just suggested the US invade a reasonably free and democratically elected government who is a major ally of ours because of some short comings in their government. Get a fucking clue. We have short comings in our own government. Let's tend our own garden before we TELL other countries how to operate their own business.

                • Sorry if my statement went over your head. I am not advocating we invade them tomorrow, however Canada and parts of western Europe do have some serious problems. Thought crimes are fascist and are one of the key ingredients that evil dictatorships need to get off the ground. Those countries are literally one bad elected leader away from a new Nazi Germany...

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by skam240 ( 789197 )

                    You've said nothing even vaguely profound here. Every country is one elected leader away from a new Nazi Germany. Hitler wasn't the second person in his political party to be elected.

    • Re:This is absolutely...has to be a troll. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @06:25PM (#54929785)

      Really? You HAVE to be trolling us.

      Nothing out of the norm is happening in Canada generally.

      In this very specific case, non-governmental persons walked all over the bounds set by law, precedent and custom in enacting a Pillar order. Sections 7 through 14 I suspect. Not, and I stress this, not the government walking all over Mr. Lackman.

      Not a lawyer, but I can make reasonable guesses as to the outcome.

      What will likely happen is on appeal, the corporations will lose (heck, even on the most basic one of the timeframe allowed). That will likely toss out all evidence gained by the corporations. It may get the corporations or their lawyers sanctioned by the judge or judges in question. It will likely open them up for a counter lawsuit by Mr. Lackman. I suspect the corporations will attempt to settle at that point, as a definitive ruling in favour of Mr. Lackman would certainly be a hit to their stock valuation.

      The fact you chose to use the term "Bill of Rights", I think, says a lot about you. We have something called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We tend to stick to it. It's why Khadr got the payment he did. And no, not because Trudeau is spineless or such (or regardless of such, if you lean that way instead), that was because the Supreme Court of Canada sat down with their copy of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and decided that by leaving Khadr, a Canadian citizen, in an American military prison and not doing fuck all to repatriate him (he could have stayed in one of our prisons you know, we _do_ have them, and they're not exactly the Tokyo Hilton too, posh-wise) was a basic violation of his rights as a Canadian citizen. Something the government at the time decided to do.

      As they say, the wheels grind slowly.

      But hey, you do your opinions, I'll do mine. Also, to help our your growth as an internet pundit, here's some free education on a foreign body's legal system: Canada's "Bill o' Rightlies"

      • The proper recompense on appeal is an award of 100% the value of the companies that perpetrated this shit to the victim, plus a criminal probe/investigation of the personal finances/relationships of the judge that signed off on the original warrant, as well as the government officials that executed it. The only way to deal with this kind of Gestapo tactic is brutal consequences. Just like the Gawker case in the US, it is high time that these companies grossly violating the laws and basic human rights be l

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by Blue23 ( 197186 )

          The proper recompense on appeal is an award of 100% the value of the companies that perpetrated this shit to the victim, plus a criminal probe/investigation of the personal finances/relationships of the judge that signed off on the original warrant, as well as the government officials that executed it.

          So you want to punish the shareholders of the corporation and not the employees who made this decision? Oh, and all the other employees who are now out a job. And, of course, destabilize the entire concept of publicly owned corporations.

          I'm for him getting over-fairly compensated. I'm for punitive measures against the people who did this both on the corporate and public level as a discouragement for others to follow that path. I am not for screwing over plenty of people innocent of this crime even if it

          • This kind of behavior flows down from the C- level and the board of directors, and yes, in the end the shareholders should take it in the pants, as they are responsible for holding the company accountable. They are the owners after all.

    • Rural communities (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @06:43PM (#54929893)
      Canada's far right has learned from the US how to leverage rural communities to get away with this stuff. The interests of city folk and rural folk often don't align. E.g. a rural person with a network connection measured in tens of kilobits probably doesn't care if some city guy gets in trouble for downloading movies. The effect is more pronounced in the US because our political system gives rural voters many, many times more voting power in an effort to be 'fair'.

      I'd like to find some way to bridge that gap but I'm not sure anyone can. The lifestyles are too different.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Altrag ( 195300 )

      The UK has been as bad or worse than the US for the better part of a decade now, maybe longer. So that's not really been a fair comparison for quite a while.

      Canada is still better than the US for protecting civil liberties. That hardly means we're perfect though and there's no shortage of people attempting to abuse our civil liberties either. Occasionally things break down and one of those attempts is successful.

      The main benefit that Canada (and even the UK) people usually talk about though is health car

      • In the US, as long as you are a productive member of society, you get health insurance through your job and access to the best health care on the planet (which is why there are plenty of affluent Canadians who visit the US for heart surgery/etc.) Most medications are developed in the US, as are most medical procedures and medical equipment.

        If you are poor in the US, you get access to Meidcaid, which is socialized medicine (the same thing you have in Canada). The poor also have free clinics available, and

        • Inability to pay hospital bills is the #1 cause of bankruptcies in the U.S.
          Such things never happen in Canada or in any other civilised nation.

          • True, in other countries they just die because they can't get the procedure because it is too expensive. Also, the rest of the world does not pay full price (AKA their fair share) in the first place. The US absorbs the vast majority of the development cost of new drugs, procedures and devices. The rest of the world waits for the generics which don't incur all of the R&D necessary to make it happen in the first place...

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Altrag ( 195300 )

              in other countries they just die because they can't get the procedure because it is too expensive

              [Citation needed]
              I've heard of lots of people dying in the US because they couldn't afford a procedure and their HMO found a loophole to let themselves off the hook. While I'm sure such a thing has happened elsewhere, you certainly don't hear about it as often.

              he US absorbs the vast majority of the development cost of new drugs, procedures and devices

              [Citation needed]
              According to http://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/features/featurethe-top-10-biggest-pharmaceutical-companies-of-2014-4396561/ [pharmaceut...nology.com], only 5 of the top 10 drug makers are US-based. So even if we ignore the fact that they're all mult

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Altrag ( 195300 )

          you get health insurance through your job

          If you're lucky. And you're assuming that whatever healthcare your job sticks you with is better than whatever healthcare the government would stick you with. The only distinction I see is that your employer has little incentive to give you more than the bare minimum unless you happen to be in a position that's difficult to replace and healthcare can be used as a perk. Aka: not most jobs. Maybe I'm not American enough but for me, people's literal lives is not a thing I want to be nickle and diming on.

          access to the best health care on the planet

          Tr

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by skam240 ( 789197 )

          I'm reading through your posts and Jesus Christ are you stupid. We don't live in the conservative utopia your stupid brain pretends we live in where everyone's needs are met by the market. Quite a lot of full time jobs in America dont offer health insurance and put you at a level of wealth that disqualifies you from government healthcare.
          Generally speaking, these jobs dont pay well either.

          • So I agree that one of us is at least self important and ignorant, I will leave you to try to figure out who. The reality is that those in the middle who don't qualify for medicaid can still go to free clinics (I know because I was that person for a while and I did). That still counts as health care. Alternatively you can move to a state that requires 40h jobs provide health care, or work for one of dozens of companies that provide health care for their unskilled/semiskilled workers (like Starbucks or Co

    • Of course, if this were the US, an entire SWAT team armed with machine guns and other military gear would've been used during the initial invasion. Then they'd claim terrorist jurisdiction to keep him from legal counsel and waterboard him if he didn't answer their questions.

    • Re:This is absolutely... (Score:4, Informative)

      by cardpuncher ( 713057 ) on Thursday August 03, 2017 @05:41AM (#54931921)
      What's going on is an over-zealous application of an Anton Piller Order [wikipedia.org]. Its intent is to allow a Plaintiff in a civil case to secure vital evidence before it is destroyed by the Defendant. It is effectively a court order to the Defendant to deliver up any relevant evidence and failure to do so is a Contempt of Court. The only relevant questions that a Defendant may be asked relate to the existence or whereabouts of evidential material. They were judicially invented in the mid 70s in the UK. Even if they are used precisely for the purpose for which they are granted they are extremely controversial and have been the subject of challenges in the various common-law jurisdictions where they are applied.

      For that reason, there are very clear rules in Canada about how searches may be conducted and those rules were clearly violated in this case, but that doesn't invalidate the evidence itself.

    • This is a nice attention alert to all the white hats, script kiddies, hackers, and delinquents. This appears like a David and Goliath situation. Guess who the general populace sides with?

      What old farts in their golden chairs don't realize is that their business sits on a large solid foundation of social tolerance.

      You pissing off even a small part of society, you start getting equipment and infrastructure stolen, vandalized, or damaged. You have trouble recruiting and keeping the best and brightest. You ge

  • Good work, Canada (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @05:47PM (#54929541)

    I'm glad I live in Germany, where we have reasonable laws and don't allow crap like this. You Canadians and Americans are so smug, but your laws are a joke. This is clearly an unreasonable way to interrogate someone. Enjoy your copyright gestapo.

    • Re:Good work, Canada (Score:4, Interesting)

      by chuckugly ( 2030942 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @05:52PM (#54929583)
      Actually this wouldn't fly in the USA, plus unlike Germany we have actual freedom of speech here. Canada, sadly, gets neither apparently.

      • Right, the country that stands by and lets Antifa burn a city and arrests people that speak against it.

      • It might not fly in the USA but it doesn't stop US corporations and government agencies from pushing other countries to do exactly what has happened here. Just look at Kim Dotcom -- effectively exactly the same thing happened to him here in New Zealand at the behest of US authorities. They UNLAWFULLY survielled him, raided his home, held him and his family at gunpoint and seized his assets.

        These kind of jackboot tactics are becoming all too common when it comes to alleged issues of copyright.

        What a shame

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Calydor ( 739835 )

      Because Germany, of all countries, has never seen laws change little by little from reasonable to unreasonable.

  • Maybe if you offered HBO Now in Canada (Score:5, Insightful)

    by elrous0 ( 869638 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @05:50PM (#54929559)

    People wouldn't have to pirate.

  • So Let's Get This Straight (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @05:55PM (#54929599) Journal

    The cable companies' lawyers went WAYYYY beyond any search warrant, clearly violated his legal rights by refusing him access to legal counsel while they were questioning them, and somehow they still can keep possession of what amounts to ill-gotten evidence (seeing as the warrant was fairly narrow in what it was allowing them to seize) because they have an ongoing appeal?

    In a properly running judicial system, there would currently be disbarment hearings against the lawyers in question and significant financial penalties against Rogers and Videotron.

    I can tell you this, civil proceedings or not, anyone who wouldn't let me get my lawyer in the room while they were interrogating me would find themselves faced with this simple statement from me "Either my lawyer is a present, or I leave this room, and if you try to detain me, I'll be filing criminal charges for unlawful confinement", because nowhere in the Common Law world am I aware of lawyers in a civil case being allowed to detain anyone for questioning.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Calydor ( 739835 )

      With the search warrant rendered null and void, how is it not considered theft of property at this point?

  • I have never heard of a civil search warrant?? At least the judge seems to have stated, clearly and unequivocally, a sane opinion of the true intent of the search. I don't know what recourse he has available under Canadian law but hopefully some justice will prevail. It clearly hasn't so far.

    • > I have never heard of a civil search warrant

      Gebus, google it.

      http://www.fasken.com/anton-piller-order-civil-search-warrant/

  • Summary doesn't make sense (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The summary of events doesn't make sense. It seems to imply representatives from the cable companies visited Adam, questioned him for 16 hours and took his stuff. And it seems to imply the police were not involved, but his lawyer was. None of that makes sense.

    If the police were not there the cable companies would have no right or ability to hold Adam, make him answer questions or take his equipment. If the police were there and no criminal charges were presented then he should have been able to kick them ou

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by elrous0 ( 869638 )

      The article says they had a court bailiff with them.

    • Re:Summary doesn't make sense (Score:5, Informative)

      by BitterOak ( 537666 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @07:45PM (#54930247)

      If the police were not there the cable companies would have no right or ability to hold Adam, make him answer questions or take his equipment

      Canadian and U.S. law are very different. In Canada, plaintiffs have very broad powers of discovery. It's up to the judge to later sort out all the evidence and decide what's relevant and what isn't. Generally if you refuse to assist in the discovery process, by refusing to answer questions or give up passwords, you risk a default judgment against you, which can be very, very costly.

  • denied right to lawyer == he wins? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    was interrogated, denied the right not to answer the questions, and denied the right to consult his answers with his lawyer, who was present.

    Not a Canadian here, and I know there are differences between the legal system up there and ours down here, but I thought a lot of basic things like "right to a lawyer" were similar to the US. Is the above not an "I win" card for the guy?

    In the US if you are denied due process, the whole case against you can be (and often is) thrown out for that reason alone. The reasoning is that you don't want the state to be able to ignore due process without repercussions, or those rights become effectively meaningles

  • Hey BeauHD (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Stop framing copyright infringement as piracy.

  • denied the right not to answer the questions

    I can see how they might physically deny him the right/ability to call a lawyer, but how was the above achieved?

    • Lackman was "not permitted to refuse to answer questions" and his lawyer wasn't permitted to counsel him in his answers. "Any time I would question the process, they would threaten me with contempt of court proceedings," says Lackman.

      They basically intimidated the living daylights out of him. I hope those jackbooted thugs get everything they have coming to them for violating someones rights like this.

  • Your ISP already knows all your URL visits. In nearest future it will start identifying content and paying content owners their share proportional to number of views.

    Everybody will pay flat ISP fee.

  • This is how it went down (Score:5, Funny)

    by Spy Handler ( 822350 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @06:22PM (#54929759) Homepage Journal

    "Well, that sounds like a really good deal. But I think I have a better one.

    How about I give you the finger (shows finger), and you give me my goddamn phone call?

    You can't scare me with this gestapo shit, I know my rights."

    [cable company agents gag the computer nerd and shove a tracking device into his bellybutton*]

  • I would hope that there is at least an audio recording if not some video. I would think there would be one for those serving the warrant and doing the interrogating. They should have to share that recording with the defence too. Unfortunately it would be in the wrong hands. The judge should make the full unedited recording available to all parties.

  • Quite disturbing. (Score:3)

    by WolfgangVL ( 3494585 ) on Wednesday August 02, 2017 @06:53PM (#54929965)

    Power begets corruption. Unfortunately, the only way to bring these powers to heel to to simply stop giving them money. Double-Unfortunately for all of us, the entirety of western civilization has been brought up to believe that in order to have any kind of fun, one must pay somebody to provide it for them, and not to pay is stealing, and stealing is a crime. This has been pounded into our collective psyche for so long even the seniors among us are beginning to believe it. As we slowly wean ourselves off of this addiction, or find ways to entertain ourselves without paying for it, our keepers will sell our protections and laws in return for their own entertainment, and this behavior will only intensify.

    It's not a politics problem, and it's not a criminal problem... it's a CULTURE problem... none of our culture belongs to us anymore, and we risk being ruined if we try to make our own... Judging by recent history, politic, and culture, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

    The public lands and parks we pay to use are full of kids consuming media on licensed (not owned) pocket computers, discussing somebody else's great ideas and inventions over somebody else's (monitored) communication system, and racing each other to the bank to buy somebody else's gadgets. They are sadly not allowed to come up with anything of their own.. for fear of trampling somebody else's copyrights and/or patents, which invites this very perversion of justice.

    This behavior will continue for the foreseeable future.

    The only way to win is not to play. Turn off your TV, stop watching movies, ditch the cellphone, and create a new kind culture... without the price tag and gatekeeper. It's the only way.

    Otherwise, we're fucked, and will have to pay for the privilege.

    Boy. That rant felt good.

  • as you'll get a contempt charge and use that against the Anton Piller order to get a lawyer.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Altrag ( 195300 )

      Pretty sure there's nothing in a standard Anton Piller order that involves an interrogation or requires the defendant to talk. Either the judge issued that part explicitly (article doesn't mention such a thing nor link to the order itself, and I'm too lazy to see if its publicly available somewhere never mind read it..)

      Or the plaintiffs were just exceeding the order's authority and being abusive. I'd hazard to say this is the more likely case given the other abuses already involved that the article did me

  • They need to go to jail (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fox171171 ( 1425329 ) on Thursday August 03, 2017 @07:30PM (#54937413)

    While I don't condone anything (allegedly) illegal on the part of the developer, if any such thing has even been done, I don't care if he is as guilty as they come, this behavior is totally unacceptable.

    The seizure is theft. If I walked into the "cable giants" building and started "seizing" stuff, I'd be off to jail. And that is where these people need to go. Anyone involved. Any lawyers should be disbarred and jailed. The CEO is responsible for everything, and should also be jailed. You or I would be. And the "theft" is very minor compared to the violation of rights.

    The Canadian government (using taxpayers money) just paid off an alleged terrorist because his rights were violated.

    The gross violation of this developer's rights are an abomination, and criminal, and these companies should pay up, and as I said above, there should be jail time for those involved/responsible.

    They need to be slapped down and hard. These industries are fond of trying to make an example out of people, and they should be treated the same.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Close