Comments on: SOCAN threatens p2pnet. Again

By: Equity player

Equity player — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 04:54:28 +0000

these responses seem pretty immature to me…even if socan is going overboard

By: inaequitas

inaequitas — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 07:34:17 +0000

I don’t think they actually don’t acknowledge the fact this is a parody, but they probably are just playing dumb to try and get you to remove it nonetheless. You are right, it is a freedom of speech issue and one that must be properly handled.

By: Pal

Pal — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 03:57:03 +0000

Andrea…. you pulled your thumb outa your butt just long enough to write a crappy Letter…hehe
Now stick it back in…… along with your funny bone……. sideways…….! AAAHahaha

By: Give it a rest

Give it a rest — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 18:24:47 +0000

“without authorisation”
“unauthorised use”
“unavoidably infringes our rights”
“immediately cease and desist”
“compl[y] with the foregoing demand”

Hey SOCAN, eff you too, a-holes.

By: Roger

Roger — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 14:51:32 +0000

All the best chum. Don’t let them get you down.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:51:21 +0000

to the first commenter:
it isn’t about copyright nazis, it’s about trademark.
SOCAN has a mark (TMA629532) registered for the following wares and services:
WARES:
(1) Mouse pads.
(2) Magazines.
(3) Candies; letter openers.
(4) Golf shirts, golf towels; notepads.
(5) Caps; plastic trade show bags.
(6) Pre-recorded musical compact discs.
(7) Sweatshirts.
(8) CD holders; pens; coasters.
SERVICES:
(1) Operation of a collective for the purpose of preserving, promoting and administering the performing rights in the dramatico-musical or musical works of music creators and the right to communicate musical works to the public by telecommunication; licensing the world’s repertoire of copyright protected music to music users in Canada (i.e. radio and television stations, cable systems, concert halls, exhibitions, movie theatres, stores, offices, restaurants, bars, skating rinks, arenas, fitness clubs, airlines, etcetera) for the public performance and communication to the public by telecommunication of those musical works in Canada; collecting license fees and distribution of royalties to its members and affiliated international societies; distribution of royalties received from affiliated international societies that are collected for the performances of Canadian musical works around the world; promoting the cultural and commercial value of Canadian music in Canada and abroad.

Jon doesn’t sell shirts with his “hairy picture” on it, does he?

By: Jot

Jot — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:44:55 +0000

I would be very interested to know what SOCAN members think about this. Is this how they want their money to be spent? If any members read this, please tell us.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:47:07 +0000

“Your search for ‘Kokonis’ returned 0 webpage(s), 0 lawyer(s), 1 publication(s), 0 media room item(s) and 0 recent matter(s). ”

google says she works for them, but their page does not show this lady
http://www.torys.com/people/toronto.aspx

Who is she?
Just another loser lawyer that was to stupid to get a real job, that’s why she needs to write such stupid letters to Jon?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:00:20 +0000

cant you stay out of trouble newton?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:58:29 +0000

This does not surprise me. In Canada if you are being sued for defamtation you must prove yourself innocent.

By: PMB

PMB — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:42:12 +0000

http://www.cippic.ca/en/faqs-resources/copyright-law/

“In Canada, unlike the Unites States, parody is not a specifically recognized defence to infringement. In one well-known Canadian case, a court proscribed a union from reproducing a corporate mascot – Bibendum, the so-called “Michelan Man” – in a parody depicting the character about to stomp on unwary workers debating the merits of unionization. The United States, in contrast, has clearly identified parody as falling within the ambit of fair use. The precise degree of protection in the United States is unclear, with courts drawing a fuzzy line that separates parody (using a work in order to poke fun at or comment on the work itself), which is protected, and satire (using a work to poke fun or comment on something else), which, arguably, is not. However, though its precise limits are unclear, parody is afforded at least some protection in the USA.”

Bah. And I thought Canada sucked less… But I still think you should tell them to go fuck themselves, in more polite words.

By: PMB

PMB — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:38:01 +0000

PARODY.

Don’t you have any form of fair use rights up there? Obviously, a parody is based on small changed to an original work. Which is an important form of expression, both in political and other areas. Using copyright to prevent parody is bullshit, and an attempt to shut down free speech.

By: Pat

Pat — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:23:58 +0000

He did ——- the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC)

By: Mark Francis

Mark Francis — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:18:03 +0000

I’m not knowledgeable about trademark, but I believe the premise is that you can’t use their mark in any manner which could be seen to be competing with them. Clearly, you are making commentary, not trying to usurp the mark.

You should query a lawyer just so you know where you stand.

By: David tz

David tz — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:10:58 +0000

isn’t there some sort of stipulation in the copyright act that states that it’s all right to use copyrights if it’s used in a satirical manner as this clearly is?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:08:58 +0000

Unbelievable!

On second thoughts, believable

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:05:37 +0000

Once again proof that these copyright nazis don’t know jack shit about fair use (or rather, they like to pretend it doesn’t exist).