3 Count: Australian for Guilty

This is daily column on Plagiarism Today where the site brings you three of the days biggest, most important copyright and plagiarism news links. If you want to offer your feedback on the column, use the contact form or just follow me on Twitter at @plagiarismtoday.

1: Pirate Bay Money Squeeze Rejected by Court

First off today, an attempt by the major record labels to fine The Pirate Bay admins every day that the site remains active has fallen short, for the time being at least. An industry attorney filed a petition with the district court asking them to start accruing penalties, saying that, despite the recent verdict against the admins, the site had refused to remove infringing torrents.

However, Peter Sunde, one of The Pirate Bay admins found guilty at the original trial, said that they have received no such requests.

The judge has decided to wait a few weeks to hear the defendant’s side of the matter but also gave the plaintiff’s a week to file an appeal.

2: Studios win Australian piracy victory

In what was the first jury trial over copyright infringement in Australia, the film and music studios claimed a victory over a shop owner who was found guilty of 15 counts of copyright infringement.

Yong Hong Lin, the store’s owner was convicted of selling pirated DVDs and CDs in his store, which held over 15,000 pirated discs, including many imported from China. Though he was convicted on 15 of the counts, he was acquitted on 16 of the 31 charges.

In Australia, the penalties for copyright infringement include up to $60,500 and five years imprisonment per offense for individuals, meaning that Mr. Lin may be facing a very lengthy jail sentence.

3: Conference Board of Canada Responds, Stands By Its Report

Finally today, Michael Geist has an update on the Conference Board of Canada’s response to the allegations of plagiarism and bias in their recent report on copyright in the digital age. According to Geist, the board is standing by their report, after fixing one instance of omitted citation, and that they “conducted a full review of the various arguments.”

Geist, obviously, still has serious issues with the citation in the article and questions the source of the data, questioning in particular one report where the bard appears to misinterpret a report that it cites.

It seems likely that this will not be the last we hear of this controversy.


That’s it for the three count today, we’ll be back tomorrow with three more copyright links. If you have a link that you want to suggest a link for the column or have any proposals to make it better. Feel free to leave a comment or send me an email. I hope to hear from you.

Want the Full Story?

Tune in every Saturday morning for the live recording of the Copyright 2.0 Show or wait and get the edited version Monday morning right here on Plagiarism Today.

Want to Reuse or Republish this Content?

If you want to feature this article in your site, classroom or elsewhere, just let us know! We usually grant permission within 24 hours.

Click Here to Get Permission for Free