Canadian Telcos Lose Their Goddamn Minds Over TVAddons

from the wtf? dept

For years, we've expressed general bewilderment at the practice in British Commonwealth countries to effectively allow private search warrants, which are given to non-government private parties, engaged in civil infringement cases, to effectively break down other people's doors and dig through their stuff. We've discussed such "Anton Piller" orders in Australia and the UK. And, apparently they apply in Canada too.

And that leads us to the craziest damn story you'll ever read about a bunch of private companies losing their freaking minds over something they believe is infringing. In this case, it's the site TVAddons, which is a site that links to various Kodi software add-ons. Kodi, if you're unaware, is open source home theater software (it was originally the Xbox Media Center, XBMC, but has expanded since then). It's quite popular and an easy way to use a device with Kodi to turn your TV into a smart TV. There are tons of perfectly legitimate and non-infringing uses for Kodi, and a variety of sources of "Kodi boxes" that allow people to make use of the features and to install a variety of useful apps -- such as adding YouTube or Netflix to your TV. Admittedly, there are some add-ons that allow users to access infringing content, though even those add-ons are just really linking to content stored openly and available online.

Still, in the last few years, the entertainment industry has completely lost its shit about Kodi boxes and the ability to use them to infringe. And more than a few sites involved in the space have been targeted. Recently, Dish Network sued TVAddons, a site that aggregates a bunch of Kodi add-ons. However, around the same time, it appears that up in Canada, all the big TV providers went absolutely insane. Bell Canada, TVA, Videotron and Rogers all not only sued TVAddons, but got an Anton Piller order allowing those companies (not police) to raid the home of the guy behind TVAddons, Adam Lackman. For fairly obvious reasons, the process of getting an Anton Piller order is one-sided. There is no adversarial process, because the other side isn't alerted beforehand that someone's trying to get an order allowing them to conduct a surprise raid to grab evidence.

The story of what happened next, first chronicled by Torrentfreak and the CBC is absolutely astounding.

And while a court eventually realized that these companies massively abused the Anton Piller process to effectively interrogate, intimidate, and hold Lackman hostage without legal representation, it came way too late -- and after they'd walked off with a bunch of his stuff, including his domains and his social media and email accounts and passwords. The story is shocking in its overreach. And, let's be clear here: the vast majority of the content on TVAddons is perfectly legal. As the court eventually pointed out, out of 1,500 add-ons, only 22 were found to be infringing. This was not a den of piracy. So keep that in mind as you read what happened. From Torrentfreak:

On June 12, the order was executed and Lackman’s premises were searched for more than 16 hours. For nine hours he was interrogated and effectively denied his right to remain silent since non-cooperation with an Anton Piller order amounts to contempt of court. The Court’s stated aim of not intimidating Lackman failed.

The TVAddons operator informs TorrentFreak that he heard a disturbance in the hallway outside and spotted several men hiding on the other side of the door. Fearing for his life, Lackman called the police and when they arrived he opened the door. At this point, the police were told by those in attendance to leave, despite Lackman’s protests.

Once inside, Lackman was told he had an hour to find a lawyer, but couldn’t use any electronic device to get one. Throughout the entire day, Lackman says he was reminded by the plaintiffs’ lawyer that he could be held in contempt of court and jailed, even though he was always cooperating.

“I had to sit there and not leave their sight. I was denied access to medication,” Lackman told TorrentFreak. “I had a doctor’s appointment I was forced to miss. I wasn’t even allowed to call and cancel.”

In papers later filed with the court by Lackman’s team, the Anton Piller order was described as a “bombe atomique” since TVAddons had never been served with so much as a copyright takedown notice in advance of this action.

I spoke with one of Lackman's lawyers, who told me that Lackman called while this search was happening, only to have the plaintiff's lawyers demand that he hang up and not talk to his lawyer. That's fucked up. Remember, this is not law enforcement. This is not a criminal case. These are private companies ransacking a guy's house and demanding he give up everything and denying him access to his lawyer. They also demanded Lackman give them information on a variety of other people -- and again threatened him with contempt if he didn't comply.

The intent behind Anton Piller cases is to prevent the destruction of evidence. In the US, we seem to deal with this in a more civilized manner -- in which defendants in cases may be alerted to preserve evidence, and failure to do so can lead to significant sanctions (and bad inferences) for "spoliation of evidence." Canada might want to think about adopting something similar.

Eventually, the court realized what a mess this was, vacating the earlier injunction and demanding that the companies return everything that they took. The court realized (again, too late) that the TV companies were using the Anton Piller order not for preservation of evidence, as is required, but for outright interrogation and discovery.

I find the most egregious part of the questioning to be in the independent solicitor’s affidavit, wherein he deposes that counsel for the Plaintiffs ‘provided Defendant Lackman with some names’ of other people who might be operating similar websites. It appears the Defendant was required to associate that list of 30 names with names, addresses and other data about individuals that might have some knowledge or relationship to those names. The list and the responses of the Defendant are found on three complete pages in the exhibits of the independent solicitor’s affidavit. I conclude that those questions, posed by Plaintiff’s counsel, were solely in furtherance of their investigation and constituted a hunt for further evidence, as opposed to the preservation of then existing evidence.

Oh, and also to destroy TVAddons before any actual legal process.

To the Plaintiffs, it mattered not that, by their own estimate, just over 1% of the Add-ons developed by the Defendant were allegedly used to infringe copyright. I therefore conclude that the purpose of the Anton Pillar Order under review was only partly designed to preserve evidence that might be destroyed or that could disappear. 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 defence to the claim made against him, and to provide an opportunity for discovery of the Defendant in circumstances where none of the procedural safeguards of our civil justice system could be engaged.

Well, no shit. Torrentfreak shows a transcript of the lawyer for the TV companies just flat out admitting that the strategy was to "neutralize" everything.

Justice: And on the next page, paragraph 5, so the experts would deactivate the TV Add-ons domains and sub-domains, so you really want to neutralize the Defendant's operations?

Lawyer for the Plaintiffs: Yeah, completely.

Justice: Completely...

Lawyer for the Plaintiffs: Yeah.

Justice: So it's more than saying you're enjoined of not operating or communicating, you really want to neutralize the guy.

Lawyer for the Plaintiffs: Yeah, completely, that's for sure. Yeah. We use his passwords, we shut down everything, we change the password and we change everything and it cannot be reactivated by him or someone else. That's the goal.

And that's what happened... until the court reversed the order and demanded they give everything back. But... in the meantime, how the hell is that allowed? The raid happened back on June 12th, and Lackman couldn't even talk about it until last week.

Incredibly, after getting slammed by this judge on June 29th, the TV companies appealed and asked to be able to keep all the access to Lackman's stuff. And that's where things are right now. The TV companies get to keep everything and Lackman has nothing... at least until there's a ruling on the appeal, and there won't even be a hearing on that for a few months. Lackman has set up a crowdfunding campaign in the meantime.

This entire story is shocking, but fits within a rather unfortunate theme that we see all too frequently around copyright. Legacy companies assume the absolute worst -- and assume that because there's some infringement somewhere everything must be wiped out and that it's blindingly obvious that they should be allowed to go in and basically destroy everything. It's the same sort of attitude that happened with the ridiculous "raid" on Kim Dotcom's mansion five years ago -- where Hollywood folks had spent so many years hyping up how Dotcom was a Hollywood-style evil villain that, clearly, they needed to bring in the FBI and special forces to raid his house with heavy weaponry and grab everything.

Over and over again, they seem to think that a little copyright infringement happening somewhere means they should now be free to destroy everything. It's quite incredible.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:29am

    That would be funny if the guy was in the US and had guns. Oh it would. And I wouldn't be sorry for them. I'm not sorry for a group acting like the mafia and sending thugs to destroy lives getting their collective arses handed back with a good kick.

    And they want people to respect copyright... Yeah.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jordan Chandler, 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:42am

    Shame

    I am a Canadian living in the USA and fuck Canada over this. This is why I'm not "proud" of Canada...unless we're also supposed to be ashamed of all decisions we have no bearing on.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      AC, 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:59am

      Re: Shame

      As a Canadian I am glad to be living in Canada. I am Proud to be a Canadian. Good Riddance Jordan, we do not want you back.

      At least the judge stood up for the little guy, how often does that happen in the USA or anywhere else.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:36am

        Re: Re: Shame

        At least the judge stood up for the little guy, how often does that happen in the USA or anywhere else.

        Oh really? And how many of the "big guys" who did this to this "little guy" did the judge send to prison?

        Yeah, that's what I thought.

        That ain't justice, my little telco apologist friend.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Jordan Chandler, 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:16am

        Re: Re: Shame

        Good. People like you I won't miss either. What kind of stupid fucking 8 year old comment isd that? "Don't let the door hit you". You're defending this situation? Are you proud of what the Canadian government let rich corporations do to a citizen? I'm confused by your righteous indignation.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:49am

    That comment

    In a just world, that comment should probably open the organizations to criminal liability for the breach of rights they caused.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:53am

      Re: That comment

      Indeed, that ought to be at a minimum:
      Tresspassing
      Kidnapping
      Theft
      and perhaps extortion for the way he was interrogated and threatened with contempt of court if he didn't cooperate.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Mason Wheeler (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:50am

    But... in the meantime, how the hell is that allowed?

    They're just following the precedent we set in the US with the DMCA, of allowing private law enforcement actions when it comes to accusations of copyright infringement. This follows directly from that.

    Now you understand why I've been saying for years that the DMCA needs to be repealed...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:51am

    Sounds like kidnapping and extortion charges are appropriate for everyone who had knowledge of what was happening at the Telcos. The good news is that since these were not the police, they won't have qualified immunity to hide behind.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:08am

      Re:

      If it weren't for the "greased palm exemption" there would be a dozen or more charges against them.

      Just try to imagine how this would have played out with the little guy suing the big guy.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ryunosuke (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:59am

    I am reminded of a line from Shadowrun: Hong Kong. (edited for relevance):

    "Here in the US, the Corps control the government. In the Commonwealth, the Corps ARE the government."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:01am

    'Over and over again, they seem to think that a little copyright infringement happening somewhere means they should now be free to destroy everything. It's quite incredible'

    yes, it is incredible but you can thank the endless bribery and corruption of the government, politicians, courts, judges and law enforcement/law makers IN THE USA for all this shit, allowing Hollywood and the entertainment industries in general to basically rule the planet, including the Internet! until someone grows a pair and stands up to these ass holes, nothing will change, with the industries thinking and being allowed to use Gestapo tactics whenever and wherever they see fit! this all goes back to the days of the video recorder and MP3 player, where the universe was going to collapse because the industries weren't able to stop people from viewing programs and listening to music when they wanted! look how totally fucked up things are now, all thanks to the USA government and tactics that are, really, worse than anything that has ever been fought against in the many wars we've had over the centuries!! fucking ridiculous!! allowing an industry that pays no taxes, doesn't pay it's own artists, gives towns a pittance for filming there but ruining everything that that's touched, then complains it wants paying for the privilege!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:03am

    Over and over again, they seem to think that a little copyright infringement happening somewhere means they should now be free to destroy everything. It's quite incredible.

    It more a case that any hint of copyright infringement gives them an excuse to destroy a legal competitor. Piracy is not the real problem, but rather the increasing number of self publishers, and the technology that makes finding and viewing that content easy. If somebody is watching self published content, they are no longer eyeballs to be counted for the purposes of gaining advertising revenue.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ryunosuke (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:10am

      Re:

      Piracy is not the real problem

      I agree, Piracy, like a black market, is a symptom of a system that is not working. Something that is in demand is not being properly vented, in this case, entertainment. Between high costs and bloated legacy channels, and the general asshole attitude of the gatekeepers like this entire article points out. People are looking for... alternative methods of consuming entertainment and culture.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 12:18pm

        Re: Re:

        I agree, Piracy, like a black market, is a symptom of a system that is not working. Something that is in demand is not being properly vented, in this case, entertainment.

        Of the parties involved here, don't the telcos most closely resemble pirates? After all, they broke into his property, held him hostage, and stole his stuff. The victim had only compiled a list of software.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    NeghVar (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:07am

    Castle Doctorine

    Too bad Canada does not have a Castle Doctrine like Texas does. Conduct such a raid on a paranoid redneck's home...use your imagination.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:27am

      Re: Castle Doctorine

      Canada does have similar rules for home invasions, but if you invite them in in any way it doesn't count. It sounds like in this case, the police and company together intimidated themselves into being allowed inside rather than physically forcing their way in. If they battering rammed your door in, you would be justified in beating them to death with a hockey stick.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        crade (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:32am

        Re: Re: Castle Doctorine

        I take it back.. You aren't allowed to choose to kill them if they are already subdued or can be reasonably subdued without doing so.. You are supposed to use "reasonable and necessary" force when subduing intruders which is quite different from castle doctrine

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        orbitalinsertion (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 2:21pm

        Re: Re: Castle Doctorine

        No, Lackman called the police, and the copyright gang just followed them in, and told the police to leave. And apparently, the police just take orders from them.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 5:13pm

          Re: Re: Re: Castle Doctorine

          Sooooo.... _technically_... he didn't invite _them_ in, he invited the police in. Maybe it was the police that invited the copyright thugs in.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Roger Strong (profile), 9 Aug 2017 @ 7:42pm

          Re: Re: Re: Castle Doctorine

          No.

          The copyright gang was accompanied by a bailiff. An officer of the court told the officers that they weren't needed and could leave.

          Since this is a civil action, in Montreal, it's also worth mentioning that the rules may be different.

          Quebec's legal system - for civil matters - is based on French-heritage civil law. As opposed to British common law for the rest of Canada and for all of the US except for Louisiana. Anton Piller orders exist in the rest of Canada, but the rules may be different.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Roger Strong (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:10am

    Express.co.uk: Kodi stream add-on site TVAddons is BACK, but here's why you should avoid it at all costs

    They describe the site as an infamous and notorious piracy site AND they tell everyone that it's now a honeypot that could get you in trouble too.

    So while the cable company's actions to destroy this guy's business were illegal... mission accomplished.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 4:12pm

      Re:

      Ah, yes. Guilty, period. Not 'guilty unless proven innocent', and forget about 'innocent until proven guilty'. Just guilty. The new standard for a Golden Age.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 6:34pm

        Re: Re:

        Ah, yes. Guilty, period. Not 'guilty unless proven innocent', and forget about 'innocent until proven guilty'. Just guilty. The new standard for a Golden Age.

        "If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a suspect.'' -- Attorney General Edwin Meese (1985)

        It seems the Golden Age began with the Regan Administration.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Retsibsi (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:28am

    An interesting point that seems to have been missed (or rather, the applicants are keeping quiet about because they know full well what could well be coming) is that overreach on an Anton Piller Order is a serious, and I do mean *serious*, breach of professional ethics/conduct on the part of the lawyers(s) who were overseeing the execution of the Order. Anton Piller Orders normally contain such a provision that the lawyers attend to prevent such overreach occurring and if that's the case here.... Such professional misconduct can form part of a wholly separate complaint to their professional body, irrespective of the court proceedings. I've seen lawyers face being struck off for such behaviour (I'm based in the UK). If Lackman feels so minded he can raise that with the lawyers professional body as a separate issue.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 12:07pm

      Re:

      Oh great! They invade his home, steal all of his stuff, hold him incommunicado for hours while interrogating him, and threaten him with anything they can come up with...but at least he might be able to get some of them censured by their professional organization. They might even, le gasp, have to transfer to supporting legal roles that don't involve actually going into court.

      Yes, the possibility of a job title change and maybe a pay cut for some of the people involved is clearly sufficient. Why, maybe we could even give them a rap on the knuckles with a wooden ruler.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:33am

    Why didn't he just say no?

    I would have called their bluff on the contempt and most anything else coming out of the mouth of a private lawyer. Force it all into an actual court to be resolved.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:50am

      Re: Why didn't he just say no?

      Maybe he wasn't ready to die. Court orders can be enforced.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Jordan Chandler, 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:17am

        Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?

        My attorney friend says he shouldn't have let them in, it was a civil warrant and not a criminal warrant. He could have fought it and just said no and they wouldn't be legally allow to break in.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          kallethen, 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:25am

          Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?

          He was in a lose/lose situation. Either let them in or face a Contempt of Court charge.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          crade (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:57am

          Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?

          According to the article, he didn't let them in, he called the cops and the cops came and let them in

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 12:24pm

          Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?

          So your "attorney friend" says "Anton Piller" orders aren't enforceable, eh? He may be your friend, but I'm not so sure I'd choose him as an attorney.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 5:19pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Why didn't he just say no?

            Saying they can be contested isn't the same as saying they're unenforceable. Perhaps a lawyer could file some sort of emergency motion, and the cops would have to wait.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 10:44am

    How many...

    of these orders have been issued to people to go raid telcos and confiscate their equipment and records looking for "evidence" to support possible legal actions? Or is Canada another of those places like the US with different laws for different people?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Aug 2017 @ 1:20pm

      Re: How many...

      Well I guess now Lackman now has a reason to get such an order against the executives and these companies to make sure they don't destroy any evidence about how they planned to lie to the judge to get the search order in the first place.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jordan Chandler, 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:18am

    Anton PIller

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

    But the Order sought in this case is not a search warrant. It does not authorise the Plaintiffs' Solicitors or anyone else to enter the Defendant's premises against his will. It does not authorise the breaking down of any doors, nor the slipping in by a back door, nor getting in by an open door or window. It only authorises entry and inspection by the permission of the Defendants. The Plaintiff must get the Defendant's permission. But it does do this: It brings pressure on the Defendants to give permission. It does more. It actually orders him to give permission—with, I suppose, the result that if he does not give permission, he is guilty of contempt of Court.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 12:35pm

      Re: Anton PIller

      It actually orders him to give permission—with, I suppose, the result that if he does not give permission, he is guilty of contempt of Court.

      Which is punishable by imprisonment by force in the amount necessary. So, it clearly can result in the use of force against a person, but only if they resist.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Grof, 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:43am

    Age old method of doing thing

    Copyright companies seem to subscribe to that statement that a US officer made during the Vietnam War when it comes to piracy.

    "We had to burn the village to the ground to save it"

    If they get their way they will eventually burn themselves to the ground along with all of us, in their quest to protect their money.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ThaumaTechnician (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 12:19pm

    Thanks for the story, Mike.

    My donation to the Indiegogo campaign is there.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    tp, 8 Aug 2017 @ 2:41pm

    Technology development

    So, this story was about some guy who has thousands of kodi addons in his site, and 1% of those addons are used by pirates. Now entertainment industry has found millions of people using those addons to do piracy, and they googled where to find the addon, and found the guy's site providing it for everyone. The guy had thousands of addon's available, but some selected one was widely used for piracy. And now the guy is in trouble because of it..

    I have mixed feelings about this. Both sides are evil in this story. If the guy has trouble filtering illegal addons away from his site, maybe he's running larger site than what he can handle. Entertainment industry has every right to go after the people who distribute the tools that are allowing piracy to prosper. If pirates are using some tools to do the piracy, the tool authors and distributors are in trouble. One person operation collecting thousands of addon's probably has problems handling legality of all the content they're posting online.

    On the other hand, entertainment industry handled this case commpletely wrong.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 3:00pm

      Re: Technology development

      Why should a third party, like this guy, decide whether or not any add on is used for copyright infringement as he is not the infringer. Indeed the infringers are the person that makes content available without a license to do so. Just because there may be too many for the TV companies to chase down does not give them the right to go after the means instead of the infringers.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        tp, 8 Aug 2017 @ 5:31pm

        Re: Re: Technology development

        > Why should a third party, like this guy, decide whether or not any add on is used for copyright infringement as he is not the infringer.

        If some technology is built for the sole purpose of infringing copyrights, then the technology itself is illegal. Even situations where there are valid uses of the tech, but most of the users are using it for illegal purposes, then the technology itself is dubious.

        People who build technology need to be aware of the possible uses of his technology and actively prevent uses that can lead to the technology being used by pirates or other criminal groups.

        People who distribute technology, need to ensure that the products are not used for illegal purposes (by anyone in the world).

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Mike Masnick (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 6:05pm

          Re: Re: Re: Technology development

          People who distribute technology, need to ensure that the products are not used for illegal purposes (by anyone in the world).

          Congrats, you just outlawed selling automobiles that go above the speed limit or crash or can be driven by drunks or by distracted drivers.

          Maybe, just maybe, we're better off when individuals take responsibility for how they use tools, rather than blaming the tools.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            tp, 8 Aug 2017 @ 6:21pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

            > Congrats, you just outlawed selling automobiles that go above the speed limit

            There would be no incentive for automobile manufacturers to improve safety of the cars, unless this rule was actually used.

            Why do you think it's worth the effort to spend billions improving car safety, if govt didn't force manufacturers to do it. It wouldn't just make any economics sense for the manufacturers at all.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Cowardly Lion, 9 Aug 2017 @ 1:27am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

              "Why do you think it's worth the effort to spend billions improving car safety, if govt didn't force manufacturers to do it. It wouldn't just make any economics sense for the manufacturers at all."

              This is patently false. In Europe we have a thing called an NCAP rating for cars. Manufacturers want as high a rating as possible because safety ratings, just like fuel consumption, build quality, performance, eco-ratings etc. are important to people. My Toyota has a 5, the highest rating. It's bristling with airbags, crumple zones, a frangible steering column and so on. No government compelled Toyota to build to this standard. More than anything else, it's a consumer-led market force.

              https://www.euroncap.com/en

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 9 Aug 2017 @ 2:45am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                "This is patently false."

                I'm sensing a trend...

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 7:52am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                It is easy for Eurotards to build really safe cars because you all drive those small clown cars.

                Get hit by a Hummer and see how safe you are then.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 9:05am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                  .. and this is why I bought that WWII Sherman tank. Your puny little Hummer will be under my treads making squealing metal noises.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:00pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

            The automobile was my first thought also. They can be used in actual crimes such as a get-away-car,, transporting illegal items, even used as a weapon. I dont see anyone raiding Ford or GM for the abuses of their technologies.

            Since this content is readily available why wasnt microsoft or google raided. The same content can be found with their search engines and browsers I assume. For that matter why not the players that play the content? Or maybe the operating systems that allow all the players to play the content?. And lastly since all these are available on the internet, why not shut the entire internet down also? Its that technology that actually enables this to go on.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              tp, 9 Aug 2017 @ 1:06am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

              > Since this content is readily available why wasnt microsoft or google raided.

              Who says they were not raided? They might want to keep it secret and not post it to internet community to digest.

              > The same content can be found with their search engines and browsers I assume.

              Browser choice is interesting. There are people in the world who don't like using browsers because of their position on things like copy-paste in view-source dialog, which allows copyright infringement of all javascript source code. The programmers who spent their life studying programming languages gets their work stolen by browser's view-source dialog.

              Note that _allowing_ the illegal operation is the bad thing. Making it easy enough that half the people on the planet is doing copyright infringement accidentally is pretty much criminal.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 9 Aug 2017 @ 2:44am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                "Who says they were not raided? They might want to keep it secret and not post it to internet community to digest."

                Oh yeah, it's not that your assertion was dumb, it's that everyone's in on the conspiracy!

                "There are people in the world who don't like using browsers"

                They're free not to access the web, other parts of the internet and other forms of communication are available.

                "view-source dialog, which allows copyright infringement of all javascript source code"

                They shouldn't be putting their code out in public, then. Apart from the fact that they will have been choosing not to use one of the many ways to obfuscate such code, it's amazingly stupid for them to be that concerned with secrecy when they choose a platform where everything by nature is publicly visible. Why have they chosen to work in a non-compiled public form of coding if they're that paranoid about their code being seen?

                It's also rather hypocritical, seeing as most of them will be using at the very least an open source browser to access other sites, if not depend on open source web servers, open protocols, etc to have their work visible in the first place.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 5:13am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                "Who says they were not raided? They might want to keep it secret and not post it to internet community to digest."


                Oh please. If they had the corp shills would be bragging about it all over the internet. Also they werent named in it.

                "
                Browser choice is interesting. There are people in the world who don't like using browsers because of their position on things like copy-paste in view-source dialog, which allows copyright infringement of all javascript source code. The programmers who spent their life studying programming languages gets their work stolen by browser's view-source dialog."

                Stolen? Really? viewing java script is not stealing nor infringing. Get real.

                "
                Note that _allowing_ the illegal operation is the bad thing. Making it easy enough that half the people on the planet is doing copyright infringement accidentally is pretty much criminal."

                Uhmm just to let you know. People make laws not the corporations. If half the people are doing it then thats almost a majority. I dont know about you, but where i live the majority is supposed to rule. Also if half the people are doing it then there is something wrong with the corp business models. businesses come and busnisses go. thats the way of things. they shouldnt forcing people to support their dreamed up monopolies in order for them to stay in business.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  tp, 9 Aug 2017 @ 5:21pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                  > If half the people are doing it then thats almost a majority. I dont know about you, but where i live the majority is supposed to rule.

                  It's just that _everyone_ who ever wrote any javascript and someone on the internet copied those javascript pieces from view source dialog, can sue both the browser makers for providing the tools to do it, and the copier for copyright infringment. The point here is that the established tools that everyone is using, are NOT immune to problems in copyright infringment analysis.

                  While they might be using _current_ best practises, when better approaches appear, the established players will want to control the market, but they will be just sued for stuff like view-source dialog in browsers.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 10 Aug 2017 @ 12:17am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                    You missed the entire point of the statement. Or you quoted the wrong statement. The point being made with that "copyright" isnt an actual "right". Its originally intended to be a temporary monopoly granted to an individual for the purpose of profiting from what they do. After that limited time expires the "work" is then opened up into the public domain.Abuses by the "copyright Holder", or their representatives, can very possibly lead to the rescinding of ALL monopolies by a vote of the people, or their representatives.

                    Now as for javascript, its just like software code. There are many ways code can be written. But with the way code works, the way code is optimized, and styles and standards are taught, the possibilities of 2 or more people writing the exact same, or similar, code are very high. especially if the the same or similar output or idea, is expected The tools to read code are there to teach, inspect, and for troubleshooting issues with the code. Proving someone used them to do a copy/paste is kinda hard to prove given the facts about how it all works. This makes "copyright" of software problematic at best and can lead to many false claims of infringement. Or abuses by copyright trolls to make money off of other peoples works by suing them and putting them "out of business"

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 5:44am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                Oh and also. If they cant make a profit off of their product they were doomed to fail from the start. As for criminal... This was and is a civil matter not a criminal one. Thats why they lawyers representing the for the corporations should be in trouble for what they did. Now taking away someones right... Thats a criminal act.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 9:09am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                "world who don't like using browsers because of their position on things like copy-paste in view-source dialog, which allows copyright infringement of all javascript source code. "

                Lots of things "allow" infringement. The fool proof only way to eliminate all human infringement is to eliminate all humans - sounds a bit foolish doesn't it?

                In your mind, what exactly constitutes infringement?

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  tp, 9 Aug 2017 @ 2:16pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                  > Lots of things "allow" infringement.

                  It doesn't have to be this way. Technology can be built in such way that it doesn't allow illegal copyright infringement to happen at all. This way humans don't always need to track manually whether you're doing copyright infringement under 200k dollars fine inside their head. Technology could make it completely impossible to do, which would save tons of manual work by users and (even) authors who build on top of other people's work.

                  Temporary solution for this was called "free software", i.e. give permission to do the operations that are desirable. But the real solution is to _prevent_ the operations that are actually illegal, via technological locks, i.e. DRM scemes and encryption etc. It just need to be accurate enough that it does not prevent interesting use cases. And this accuracy is what is currently missing in our technologies - you either need to prevent useful operations, or you need to allow copyright infringement. But that's only technical problem: how to make your infringement tests accurate enough.

                  Why should people be scared of crossing some invisible copyright infringement lines, if technology can make following copyright completely automatic?

                  Of course, if would be sad, if your business model is based on copyright infringment. Once the proper DRM tech is availble, everyone will notice how badly our old technologies are working, and how the big (copyright) problem was caused by the deficiencies of our technologies.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 10:44pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                    Technology can be built in such way that it doesn't allow illegal copyright infringement to happen at all.

                    That cannot be done perfectly, and requires that you do not have any control over the devices used to display copyrighted content. It would also require that devices that can record are also under the same control, lest you switch them on when any copyrighted material is being played or displayed anywhere near them.

                    What you are suggestion leads to most people having less rights than serfs, who while tied to to the land, also could not be thrown of of the land. Copyright maximalism leads towards one or two big corporations owning almost all of the tools in you life, and able to turn them off whenever the need you to spend money on a replacement.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  tp, 9 Aug 2017 @ 3:08pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                  > In your mind, what exactly constitutes infringement?

                  Well, when someone is spending tons of work to create some product, and then it's being distributed around the world without compensation to the author. Every author has limited reach in the world, and if users don't find the authorised entity, then compensation does not flow to the right place. Middleman is taking the money, and it does not reach the correct author. Reachability analysis is essential to copyright infringement analysis.

                  How to detect copyright infringement: Count the amount of effort that went into the product. Put minimum wage to it. If the price you paid was _smaller_ than the effort that was spent to create it -- you have workers working for no payment. For example Free Software/youtube/wikipedia went to this trap that they have tons of unpaid slaves working for them. Analysis of compensation is essential to infringement determination.

                  Everything where the money goes to the middleman who didn't deserve the money, constitutes copyright infringment. There's tons of companies that are selling "hot air", i.e. products that they didn't create themselves. IT doesn't have to be _because of copying_ the product, but for example if the company forgets to pay the salary for the author, then the middleman is taking the money, and it does not reach the right author.

                  Copyright law assumes that authors can handle their own money problems. This might be too optimistic view. Authors are still being ripped off by middleman who just takes the money and runs, without passing share of it to the people who spend the time..

                  Counting spent time and spent effort is essential to proper infringement analysis. If you spent the time, you should have compensation. When this is not being followed to the letter, then there's infringement. All the current technologies fall into this trap, including youtube, wikipedia, free software, social media platforms, etc... Pretty much all internet technologies are all completely broken.

                  These broken internet platforms are only accepted beacuse we don't have anything better. Everyone of us can help making it better.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 7:50am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

            Don't you think that is coming Mike? Think a self driving car will be allowed to go over the posted speed limit? Won't have to worry about drunk driving either. That is a different subject.

            Products can be used for legal or illegal purposes, granted, but I can't leave a legally owned loaded gun sitting out on my front lawn unattended and not expect to be held responsible if a kid comes along, picks it up and shoots themselves, can I? I mean, that dead 6 year old should take some personal responsibility for his actions, right?

            If some of those apps were only used for illegal purposes, then maybe there is a bit of responsibility of the guy that was hosting it. Amazon sells quite a few products, pretty sure they take down ones that are 100% illegal.

            Of course, I have no idea what Kodi software does outside of reading this article, but what was written about in this article makes me laugh. Forget being in Texas and shooting them, just let your dog loose on them. If you can't legally own a gun, you can still own a Doberman in Canada, right? "But your honor, I complied with your order, but my dog can't read so he bit those jerks" Of course, after biting one of their lawyers, the dog would probably have to go get additional shots, thus costing you even more money and hassle.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 10 Aug 2017 @ 1:26pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

              "Products can be used for legal or illegal purposes, granted, but I can't leave a legally owned loaded gun sitting out on my front lawn unattended and not expect to be held responsible if a kid comes along, picks it up and shoots themselves, can I? I mean, that dead 6 year old should take some personal responsibility for his actions, right?"

              Nice straw man... so in the above case not only you need to take ownership, but the store you bought the gun from.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 10:27am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

            You forgot that those automobiles could be used as get away vehicles in robberies and to traffic drugs.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 11:16am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

              The question is are SOME of the apps ONLY used for illegal purposes? I literally don't know, but if they are ONLY used for illegal purposes then I can see some fault in the guy having them on his site.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Vikarti Anatra (profile), 10 Aug 2017 @ 6:26am

          Re: Re: Re: Technology development

          So it's ok to say techdirt should be closed because of (very likely) law iolation of Russian Federation's laws on processing of personal data.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 6:39pm

      Re: Technology development

      If the guy has trouble filtering illegal addons away from his site, maybe he's running larger site than what he can handle.

      If Sony couldn't filter illegal recordings away from their VCR's, then maybe they were into more than they could handle, eh?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        tp, 8 Aug 2017 @ 8:28pm

        Re: Re: Technology development

        > If Sony couldn't filter illegal recordings away from their VCR's, then maybe they were into more than they could handle, eh?

        Yup. If I remember right, vcr manufacturers were in fact sued for this problem. During the years, there has always been manufacturers who do not care about following the rules - and they just hope noone would notice.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 8:33pm

          Re: Re: Re: Technology development

          Yup. If I remember right, vcr manufacturers were in fact sued for this problem.

          Maybe you should go read Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. to remind yourself how that turned out for you guys.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            identicon
            tp, 8 Aug 2017 @ 8:55pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

            > Maybe you should go read Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. to remind yourself how that turned out for you guys.

            If these guys were actually sued, it means someone in the world was thinking the technology is illegal. This sounds like they ought to fix the problem in their tech. Sadly we're still waiting for the fix, but guess it means they didn't care about the position of the other side of the case.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 11:56pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

              Being sued does not make something illegal, but it is a tactic that the labels and studios have used to kill off legal competitors.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              PaulT (profile), 9 Aug 2017 @ 12:29am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

              "If these guys were actually sued, it means someone in the world was thinking the technology is illegal. This sounds like they ought to fix the problem in their tech."

              Erm, someone thinks that EVERY technology has illegal purposes. Name the tech, someone complains about it having illegal or immoral uses.

              Sorry, sometimes it's not the technology at fault.

              "Sadly we're still waiting for the fix, but guess it means they didn't care about the position of the other side of the case."

              In the case of the VCR, "the position of the other side of the case" was proven utterly baseless, and the movie industry built a highly lucrative and profitable VHS rental industry, closely followed by an equally successful VHS sales industry, once they stopped suing and whining and started innovating. So lucrative, in fact, that it was to protect this business that they started trying to cripple DVDs, attack streaming/download distribution and so forth. Until they learned how to make money from those, of course.

              Sometimes, the real problem is the person doing the complaining.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 4:18am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

              Sadly we're still waiting for the fix

              You're still waiting for Sony to "fix" VCR's? Wow.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 5:44am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technology development

                The "fix" for VCRs turned out to be building a better product and letting the VCR eventually fade into obscurity.

                The lesson to take from VHS is obviously that if you file lawsuits, the problem will eventually get solved.

                Yep, that's definitely the lesson here.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Just Sayin, 8 Aug 2017 @ 2:48pm

    Seems to me that the right decision is to refuse permission, keep the door locked and take the contempt of court charge - that way they have to come back WITH the police (have your lawyer present) and you get to keep all your stuff.

    Seriously, take the time while they are scrambling to get a warrant to change all your passwords, back up all your data to the cloud, and get stinking, puking drunk so they can't question you.

    Optionally, it might help to sit there "cleaning" your firearms while they try to intimidate you as well - if you decide to skip the drinking part above, that is.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 4:12pm

      Re:

      Seems to me that the right decision is to refuse permission, keep the door locked and take the contempt of court charge - that way they have to come back WITH the police (have your lawyer present) and you get to keep all your stuff.

      That's one of the messed up parts of the story, the police were there, and were the reason he opened the door, it's just they were told to leave.

      'Fearing for his life, Lackman called the police and when they arrived he opened the door. At this point, the police were told by those in attendance to leave, despite Lackman’s protests.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Advocate (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 3:09pm

    The answer is clear. Eliminate copyright. It serves no useful purpose in modern society.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      tp, 8 Aug 2017 @ 5:57pm

      Re:

      > The answer is clear. Eliminate copyright. It serves no useful purpose in modern society.

      When you're young, copyright is a restriction on what you can do. When you get older, and need to actually create yourself all the products that you consume, copyright becomes something useful. It prevents you from burning out from constant market demands of more and more products. The work amount limits only work because large number of people follow copyright limitations.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 6:47pm

        Re: Re:

        Some people have to actually work for a living. They don't get to sponge off the copyright wagon.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 7:55pm

        Re: Re:

        Exactly. The whole world should make do with just a few million spatulas, otherwise all of the poor spatula makers will burn out from the constant market demands of more and more products. In fact, every spatula maker should only have to create one spatula, then charge people for using it for the rest of his natural life (plus 70....100...150....300...1000 years). Otherwise he'll burn out from the market demand for spatulas.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 9 Aug 2017 @ 12:41am

        Re: Re:

        "When you get older, and you want to retire off the work you did decades ago, copyright becomes something useful"

        Fixed for reality.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 15 Aug 2017 @ 10:46pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          It's the guy who thinks copyright is a mechanism by which authors have the right to remove works they made from the market. Report and ignore for his failure to understand law, and move on.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 9:16am

        Re: Re:

        "When you get older, and need to actually create yourself all the products that you consume,"

        Ummmm - what?


        "It prevents you from burning out from constant market demands"

        What market and what are they demanding?
        Not sure wth you are talking about.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 6:41pm

      Re:

      The answer is clear. Eliminate copyright. It serves no useful purpose in modern society.

      It never did. Abolish copyright.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 8 Aug 2017 @ 4:20pm

    Playing the legal system like a fine instrument

    That those involved aren't facing serious penalties, and are in fact still arguing that they did nothing wrong shows how screwed up the law is and how pathetic the judges involved are being.

    The man was essentially imprisoned in his own home, denied access to a lawyer while threatened with contempt charges if he didn't 'cooperate', when he called for the police the police were sent away after they got him to open the door, they flat out admit that the purpose was to destroy his business rather than 'preserve evidence'... this should be a trivial case to get through, and the judge who originally approved their little raid should be furious to have been used so blatantly, but I guess in Canada, as in the US, 'Everything goes so long as you claim it's copyright related'.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Daydream, 8 Aug 2017 @ 4:47pm

    If that happened at my place...

    You know, several people I don't know hiding in a corridor; very suspicious.

    But if the police come and decide there isn't a problem, I guess I could take their word for it and let them in.

    But, preventing me from calling a lawyer, or a doctor, and trying to keep me from any electronic communication at all? Ransacking my house and walking away with my stuff, demanding my passwords and email accounts and everything? Making 'legal' threats against me unless I stay put in one place and answer all their questions?
    I would officially consider it a home invasion and...honestly? I'd probably grab a steak knife from the kitchen and use it to keep them away from me while I call the police back.

    ...Although, I probably wouldn't have let them in in the first place. If I saw a bunch of people at my front door, I'd tell them they're at the wrong place for the surprise party. And if they insisted they had a court order (which being ex parte, I probably wouldn't have known about beforehand), I'd call bullshit and tell them to go away or at least wait until I verify it.

    Would that make me an overall reasonable person?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Cowardly Lion, 9 Aug 2017 @ 2:01am

      Re: If that happened at my place...

      Very reasonable and sensible of you. I'd also call their bluff. I'd want to go down the contempt of court route with the hope/intention of discussing this with the idiot judge who ordered it. The people knocking at the door couldn't use actual force against me, nor could they force entry. They couldn't arrest me. They could ask the police to make an arrest and that could go either way. If they police did arrest me I'd be locking my door behind me. The police wouldn't have entry to my house unless they secured their own warrant to enter.

      So if things went that far, if the police did arrest me, at least I'd be talking to my lawyer. Between us we'd be hoping that someone senior in either law enforcement or the courts would see sense.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Roger Strong (profile), 9 Aug 2017 @ 7:50pm

        Re: Re: If that happened at my place...

        If they police did arrest me I'd be locking my door behind me. The police wouldn't have entry to my house unless they secured their own warrant to enter.

        That would not have worked, given that a bailiff was already present with court order allowing him and the cable company thugs to enter.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Alexander, 8 Aug 2017 @ 6:11pm

    Sweetest Revenge?

    So,
    The Judge recognises and confirms with the Corps lawyers that the objective was to destroy his livelihood, not actually execute the Anton Pillar order and preserve evidence.
    so,
    The Judge should order not just the return of the all assets and properties, but a lifetime annual stipend to replace the livelihood they destroyed. Take it from the Lawyers insurance, then the Judge should refer them to the Bar to have them disbarred for conspiracy to pervert the law, clearly admitted in evidence in Court.
    They need to be slapped senseless for abuse of the Law in ways that make others refuse to participate in such egregious perversions.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Aug 2017 @ 9:16pm

    If i didnt know better i would swear this post is an attempt to attract a lawsuit. Lose their minds?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 9 Aug 2017 @ 3:12am

      Re:

      Saying they lost their minds actually strikes me as being far too kind after this stunt. They invaded the guy's house, forced him to answer questions and refused to allow him to contact a lawyer, stole a bunch of his stuff, admitted in court that their goal was to shut him down rather than 'preserve evidence'...

      'Not-so-momentary insanity' is the nice explanation for their actions, with other possible explanations being far less flattering.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2017 @ 9:19am

    Guess this story will make a few people rethink their plans to move to Canada.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.