rafael is one of p2pnet’s most outspoken proponents who has written extensively here on copyright infringement and other issues based on first-hand experience, not least detailing how his family has been ripped off by the cartels.

this lawsuit and this website are not the arenas for this type of argument. and this type of silly argument has the force to split the p2p community into sides. there are only 2 sides. it’s us vs. them. that’s it. and if you allow it to fester and grow, it will have achieved exactly what the cartels and sharman want to achieve.

please refrain from pointing fingers and daring people to put up or shut up. you’re anonymous but at least rafael signs his name. where’s your money, huh? see how silly it is? i don’t know who you are and would have no way of verifying if you’ve donated. so what business is it of yours if rafael donates or not? what business is it of mine to even ask you if you donated?

there are plenty of people who will donate and plenty who can’t but who will support jon in other ways that can’t be measured in dollars and cents.

don’t fall into the blame game. do what you can and leave it at that.

Nothing said can help a reasonable person or court establish economic damages, which, on the instant case can only mean loss of income and legal expenses.

To begin with, only the difamed person can really know what the damages are, so it must be the plaintiff to make a claim for damages. Then Jon has to prove that the claims are wrong or exagerated.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

however, as far as libel/defamation goes, yes it appears in BC you are considered guilty in valid libel/defamation cases unless you can show otherwise.

Once the defamatory character of the statement is established, the court will presume that the words of the publication are false.

The Plaintiffs in a defamation case need only prove that the words refer to them, either directly or by reasonable implication. Thats it.

read it all at: http://www.cippic.ca/en/faqs-resources/defamation/
This is very general site though… 3 provences in Canada (excluding QC) have a couple of things different than the above link, BC, SASK and another is in the 3. So the above link should be used as informative only.

I seem to have lost my links that points out the diff in laws with BC and the rest of Canada in libel/defamation cases… Will try and find it..

Does this mean that if a person of which nothing is known about his/her finances and income, alleges that he/she was defamed and as a consquence has suffered $XXXXXXXXXX damages and the defendant cannot prove that the claim of $XXXXXXXXXX in damages is false the damages for $XXXXXXXXXX in damages are awarded to plaintiffs by the court because of some silly rule that says you are guilty until proven innocent?. All without a shread of real evidence the damages were actually real?

If yes, then Canadian law is really as screwed up as American law. Then Canada should be on the list of countries where basic freedoms do not exist.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

Surely Sharman must allege they suffered damages and surely proving that the allegations od suffered damages are wrong should not be difficult.

It is like proving that beating a dead horse did not kill the horse.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

(please read links given in this thread on bc law and the links on the other original thread).

In BC when a libel suit is made, the court assumes automatically that they (kaza et al) suffered damages, and is biased towards them.

Its all up to Jon to prove everything, not kaza et al.

I don’t think the case is dead in the water at all since the courts are biased (by law) towards kaza et al.

If anything the outcome of this will force Jon into bankruptcy forcing him to sell assets etc… Hope everything is in his wifes name.

Don’t get me wrong here, I’m all for Jon 100%.. but it appears this is the likely outcome from everything i have read.

I would personally try to settle this out of court, if possible, and if they gave him this opportunity to do so, or if jon communicated his wishes to do so.

I also read last night that if p2pnet is jon’s sole source of income he can also be entitled to legal-aid for free. If he surpasses the monetary value for the number of people in his household for legal aid, this is another way to get it. I’m sure Jon read the links in this thread and criteria for legal-aid though…

As for what you said about merit of damages… I agree with you. Some kid replying to jon’s article about off-shore accounts etc… There were no damages. The AU courts (which kaza et al) are already fighting have also raised this question if you google the AU court happenings.

I wonder if all this can be delayed somehow till the AU courts publish all their findings….

In addition, I think court awards damages (this could be ON and not BC though, or maybe both, not 100% sure) based on how many people had access to read the libelous material.

In order to reduce monetary damages, the courts will consider if the infringing material has been removed and weather an apology was given for the material. So jon HAS to remove the material from public access in order to appease the courts and lower possible monetary damages.

anyhow….

On a difamation lawsuit, plaintiff may ask ask for the following if a damaging, untrue story is published:
a. Retraction.
b. A damage award for proven damages.

My undesrtanding of this case is that:
a. The story has been retracted (removed) from p2pnet.
b. Damages cannot be proven to have been caused by one published story that says what other similar stories had said earlier. In such a scenario, the damages were cause by the first publication of the damaging story.

But then we have the fact that Sharman Networks has already been driven to the ground by the actions of the copyright cartels. Therefore any reduction in sales or profits must be attributed to that situation and not some published story that could not have driven away some customers and the resulting profits, because all customers had already been driven away.

It seems to me that this case is dead on arrival.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

However, I think Jon needs to generate publicity, as shity as it sounds.

As my posts said on a diff thread.. Ebay it. Gernerate as much attention as is will bare. MILK IT FOR ALL ITS WORTH. You have no choice. This will genarate debate and hopefully genrate revenue for your defence and sticking up for all of us.

Many say.. “right on Jon”… very few will say k Jon here’s a f*ckin 20$ bill for you to keep it up and protect what we all believe in.

I AM A POOR MOFO WITH 2 KIDS WIFE ETC.. I HAVE 20$. Jon is getting my 20$. All i can afford with the family and one person working for this month. AND this comes comes from my B-day money i got :/

RALLY to the best of your capabilities NOT ONLY JON, BUT YOU! YES YOU THE PERSON READING THIS. SPREAD IT. Put is on every CDN site possible.

SUPPORT WHAT U ARE DOING. If you can’t mail jon a lousy 20. Mail a 5$.

I have never even heard of this friggin site till the article was posted on slyke or whatever its called.

BUT I AM CANADIAN.
I AM F*CKING PROUD TO BE CDN.
I support CDN.

1$ 2$ 5$ 20$ 1000$ SUPPORT whAT yoU (YES U) beleive in. Even if you’re a poor f*q like me with a family who can’t give much of anything. :/

Jon like i posted in a diff msg i don’t know you… never been to this www. BUT I WILL BE F*CKING DAMNED if i don’t support what i have been preaching and what i believe in.

/me gives the finger to kazzaa et al.

I never ever used P2P before to top it off… I never heard of this site before this lawsuit…. FTP man myelf :/

ITS THE F*CKING REASONING AND POTENTIAL LITIGATION THAT CAN BEFALL ALL OF US CDN’S.

Make a stand for what u F’N believe in, I DARE ALL OF U.

thanks….

perhaps i misread???

Otherwise, I didn’t say I actually had a lawyer – I said I’m getting interest from a couple of people who are thinking about it.

he has already posted that he has a lawyer, but every bit of info helps.

-VERY GOOD BC legal/legal-aid services site
http://www.lss.bc.ca/

-Also on that above link: http://www.lss.bc.ca/Legal_aid/Legal_information/law_line.htm :
LawLINE, a legal aid service, is a toll-free hotline for people in BC that provides:
information about print and website materials and resources that can help you resolve your legal problem,
referrals to other services if another LSS program or another agency could help you resolve your legal problem, and
legal advice that may include written opinions and advice, correspondence, help writing documents, and contact with third parties, but does not include being represented in court or other hearing.

-Lots of good stuff here: http://www.lss.bc.ca/Resources/links.htm

http://www.cba.org/BC/Initiatives/main/lawyer_Referral.aspx
provides the opportunity to have a consultation with a lawyer for up to 30 minutes for a fee of $25 plus taxes.

If you don’t have a lawyer representing you, the BC Supreme Court Self-Help Information Centre in Vancouver can help you get the information you need to prepare your Supreme Court family or civil case. (this may include free legal clinics):
http://www.supremecourtselfhelp.bc.ca/

http://www.cba.org/BC/Public_Media/dal/default.aspx
Call Dial-A-Law If You
think you may have a legal problem and want practical information on the law involved,
want to find out about your legal rights and responsibilities, or
want to learn more about the law and the legal system in British Columbia.

If anyone has the time and Jon’s permission, Someone should write a good letter to these people see if they can refer a pro-bono or give a hand.
http://www.canadianfreespeech.com
http://www.cippic.ca

heh in closing statements jon should do just that.

go get a cork-board from some office supply store or similar.

Pin a letter on it and write I am being sued.
Undernetah it pin aother letter (take the worse anon one directly from the forum).
pin another and so forth…

Then say this is what i am being sued for.

Interesting analogy.

Good theatrics for a closing statement and to drive a point across

In addition, if jon is going to rep himself, the prosecuting attorny has to submitt all pertinant info on the case TO JON at jon’s request. Against the law to with-hold information when he requests it. The prosecuting attorny will eat a shitload from the judge and bar association.

Also, since Jon is rep’ing himself he can make the courts (and procesuting lawyer) aware of this and he can also request a time extentions on filling doc’s, submitting doc’s and a time extention on the case itself. Courts have to take this into consideration that he has no legal and is doing it himself.

Every minute the prosecution touches sumthing about the case or even thinks about the case, the prosecuting lawyer will add to the bill of the kazzaa people, which could be a huge amount. Even a one-minute phone call from jon to the prosecuting lawyer can cost kazzaa 100$ (based on minimum charge).

But what isn’t clear is if jon will be charged $ for this by the prosecution. Can they go against Jon for the lawyer fee’s? This will depend on his proven income-tax statements maybe and what the cut-off line is in BC.

Also what isn’t clear, If Jon needs to submitt documentation to the courts and reply to the prosecution documents on stated income and what ever else, Can he also call the prosecution to help him with the required documentation at no charge. This is VERY possible, and maybe not limited to just QC. It may be limited to stated income. This is what i dont know.

I’m sure Jon has already called legal-aid in BC or the cdn-BC bar association to find all this out though. Nothing like having the prosecuting lawyer work for you at no charge and charged back to the people sueing you. heh

All these little details can save jon an easy 2000$+

I’m QC, been through it myself (but not a supreme court libel case or a case where someone is seeking monetary damages), I don’t think this is solely based on french law, but rather CDN law and the persons income-tax statements and rights to legal counsel.

Just adding my 2-cents is all, and maybe trying to give some idea’s on how he can do this alone (which i don’t suggest) at the least cost to him.

p2pnet is not the digital equivalent of a book, magazine, newspaper, or other forms of publication.

p2pnet is more like a cork board in a store that anyone can pin their ads, flyers, cards, letters, etc. onto without asking permission.

Now, here’s the kicker. If there was an item published in a magazine verbatim that makes totally false statements about someone, that is libelous material that the publisher allowed to be printed foolishly, and the publisher can be held responsible for allowing an unchecked clump of information to go through. If there was the same item printed up on a piece of paper and stuck to a cork board that’s basically open to anyone to say whatever they like (one could call them freedom of speech boards at that rate), you’re not going to see the store manager or owner getting sued for someone anonymously putting the flyer up.

Even if you have the burden of proof for a libel or slander suit in Canada, the fact that you are only the cork board provider while someone else posted the content in question…you get the idea.

It was determined that online sites who basically blog and post stories etc were not afforded the same rights as publishers or have the right to be called a publisher and hence were not afforded the rights to conseal sources of information like real publishers do. They also refuse to acknowledge to call bloggers or story submitters publishers for the above reasons.

That being said, can he even be sued as a publisher?
Can this news site be considered a blog?

Again, bare in mind i forget if this was based in the US or Canada, or both, maybe someone can look into it.

I’m just trying to help find argueable idea’s that may (or may not) help :/