[Cdn-DMCA] Fw: DMCA on signup
russell at flora.ca
Mon Jul 15 09:57:29 EDT 2002
On Sun, 14 Jul 2002, Michael Richardson wrote:
> The name, in the article, is CUIC.
And the offensive document is:
"6. Subject to the provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and
any other applicable laws and regulations, Canadian Unlimited Internet
Corp. reserves the right to remove or block access to, either permanently
or temporarily, any files which Canadian Unlimited Internet Corp. suspects
or which a third party alleges are associated with a violation of the law,
this Agreement or CUIC Online Policies or with the account responsible for
such violation. This includes but is not limited to blocking access to
Usenet news articles."
Are incorrectly worded contracts valid? The phrase "and any other
applicable" suggests that the previous reference is applicable, when it is
It sounds like the shrink-wrap/click-wrap problem all over again -
having agreements in place which are contrary to the laws-of-the-land.
This is a Hull company: http://www.cuic.ca/alternate/contactus.htm
> This fellow should contact the competition bureau.
> Refusing to do business with someone can actually be against the
> competition laws. "Refusal to deal".
The competition bureau is under-supported by its conflict-of-interest
host of Industry Canada. You won't likely get any response, and I'm not
sure we would want you to. I "refuse to deal" with customers for
arbitrary (to them, not to me) reasons all the time. Simple things like
"I don't support proprietary software products", which is even listed in
my online resume.
Note: I would "refuse to deal" for the reverse - a customer who wanted to
promote DMCA-like laws in Canada wouldn't likely stay a customer of mine
I am still pushing the "tied selling" case with DVD's, and have even
since read the Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines which also
suggests my interpretation of the law was correct.
> Anyway, the guy wouldn't have been on the internet anyway - CUIC is
> downstream from Storm Internet, and Storm is a "tcp-port-80" mostly ISP
> - they do not let arbitary IP packets through to their customers to
> "protect them"
I still believe it is useful to try to educate people who forget they
are in Canada. I find it ironic that a company in Quebec appears to
promote US law.
Your point about ICMP filtering done by Storm is just another
educational issue that people need to find out about.
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
See http://weblog.flora.ca/ for announcements, activities, and opinions
Happy 4'th of July http://weblog.flora.org/article.php3?story_id=201
USA and ICC http://weblog.flora.org/article.php3?story_id=203
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.flora.org/dmca/
More information about the Discuss