Part 2 of the republication of my meta-analysis.
In May of 2012, a series of studies was published on ZeroPaid by me in response to a study that suggested file-sharing was causing a decline in the entertainment industry. The meta-analysis garnered a huge response back then, so I am happy to republish my work here on Freezenet for those who missed it back […]
File-sharing litigation has continued to be a trend in 2015. This is in spite of the fact that such activities don’t produce any real tangible effects in overall market and file-sharing trends.
We’ve been running a project that’s all about debunking myths perpetuated by supporters of the trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Today, we turn our attention to an article in a newspaper from the Law Times that is also running some of these myths.
A company working on behalf of Voltage Pictures has recently litigated more alleged copyright infringers. This time, the movie they are suing fans over is the film “The Company You Keep”.
Canadian firm Dawn Riding Films Inc. has filed a lawsuit against 193 BitTorrent users who it accused of sharing the 2012 remake film Dawn Rider.
Earlier, Rightscorp was accused of sending mislead demand letters through the Canadian notice-and-notice system. Now, it seems the Canadian government has stepped in and told companies like Rightscorp to stop sending misleading demand letters.
Earlier this week, the Canadian notice-and-notice law took effect. Now, it seems that copyright holders are sending legal threats which contain false information about the legal reality in Canada.
While a lot has been happening between India censoring websites, file-sharing porn cases proceeding through courts in the US, and UK ISPs hijacking browser sessions, Canada has quietly seen new copyright laws come into effect.
Malibu Media was dealt with a setback in a file-sharing lawsuit against an alleged file-sharer. It was an interesting case where the defendant said that the hard drive failed and it had to be replaced. Malibu Media claimed that this act alone constituted destruction of evidence. The court disagreed with the assessment and denied their […]