Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Best Buy, Staples accused of 'urging' customers to pirate TV shows with devices sold

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,438
    Satfix Buxs
    239,236
    Thanks
    3,977
    Thanked 6,873x in 2,669 Posts
    Items Crown Royal
Gift received at 11-09-2019, 09:07 PM from Putski
Message: Have a couple drinks on me..Sword

    Default Best Buy, Staples accused of 'urging' customers to pirate TV shows with devices sold

    4 retailers named in a lawsuit launched by Super Channel deny the allegations
    CBC News · Posted: Sep 15, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 6 hours ago


    Premium TV network Super Channel has filed a lawsuit against four major Canadian retailers for allegedly selling 'pirate devices,' including Android boxes loaded with specific software. (Shutterstock)


    Premium TV network Super Channel has filed a lawsuit against four Canadian retailers for allegedly selling "pirate devices" and educating customers how to use them to watch TV without paying for it.

    In a court document filed in Federal Court this week, Super Channel accuses Best Buy, Staples, Canada Computers and London Drugs of copyright infringement, claiming their employees are "urging" customers to pirate online content using streaming devices that are sold in store.

    The four retailers "are advertently contributing to the creation of a culture of widespread infringement and theft," Super Channel alleges in the document. "Their actions are high-handed and unfair to their customers and causing damage to the plaintiff."

    Also listed as defendants in the lawsuit are customers who bought the "pirate devices" and received accompanying advice in store. They're currently listed as "John Doe customers" because Super Channel doesn't have their names, although it plans to pursue this information.

    The network wouldn't name each of the "pirate devices" involved, but said that the case includes Android boxes, which have become the scourge of the cable industry. When special software is added and the boxes are connected to TVs, they can be used to stream unauthorized content — including movies and TV shows that Super Channel owns the rights to in Canada.

    Customers only pay a one-time fee for the box, usually around $60 to $200.

    Caught on camera
    As part of its case, Super Channel claims to have more than 100 hours of undercover video gathered by private investigators who visited multiple Best Buy, Staples, Canada Computers and London Drugs locations, posing as customers curious about pirating content.

    Super Channel provided CBC News with a segment of the video. It includes audio allegedly from employees from each of the four retailers, who offer advice about in-store devices that can be set up to stream shows without paying for them.

    "This gets you free content, like free TV and movies," someone said in one audio clip from the video.

    "You don't have to pay for anything else when you pay for this," said another.

    Super Channel CEO Don McDonald said he was "shocked" when he viewed the footage. The video captures more than 150 incidents supporting Super Channel's case, he said, and that the employees involved in promoting these devices range from floor staff to higher-ups.

    "Managers that are not kids — they're in their 30s and 40s, telling people how to do it," McDonald said. "It is rampant."

    Why would store staff assist customers? In the court document, Super Channel alleges the motive is "to encourage and increase the sales of the pirate devices."

    Best Buy, Staples, Canada Computers and London Drugs — which each received copies of the lawsuit this week — told CBC News that they deny the allegations and follow Canadian copyright laws.

    "[We] believe that the claims are entirely without merit," a Best Buy spokesperson said in an email. "We respect and value intellectual property, and believe content providers and artists should be fairly compensated for their work."

    McDonald said that Super Channel showed the video to the four retailers in the spring, but that failed to put a stop to the problem. "I wanted them to be step up and be a champion in changing the culture," he said. "They didn't see the light."


    CBC News asked each retailer about their meeting with Super Channel. Only London Drugs responded, stating that the network refused to disclose which products it took issue with.

    "Nevertheless, we took the opportunity to remind our employees of the importance of Canadian copyright compliance and adherence to our code of conduct," London Drugs spokesperson Wendy Hartley said in an email.

    War on piracy
    Super Channel is seeking damages for loss of business due to the retailers' customers pirating its content. It also wants a permanent injunction to prevent Best Buy, Staples, Canada Computers and London Drugs from selling and promoting "pirate devices."

    "We want the stores to stop. We want the stores to say, 'Hey this is wrong,'" said McDonald.

    The lawsuit is just the latest attempt to curb piracy in Canada. In 2016, Bell, Rogers and Videotron launched a legal battle in Federal Court, targeting smaller dealers who sell Android boxes pre-loaded with software used to pirate content.

    The case is ongoing and the list of defendants has ballooned from five in 2016 to more than 130 today.

    Last year, Bell and Rogers also joined a coalition of more than 30 members, including CBC and Super Channel, which proposed blocking Canadians from websites offering pirated content. However, the plan was rejected by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, which said it didn't have jurisdiction to enforce it.
    Critics have argued it's impossible to stamp out technology that enables piracy, so the best solution is to offer affordable and easily accessible programming.

    McDonald estimates Super Channel loses about $12 million a year from subscribers who turn to piracy. He said he hopes the lawsuit will help change the culture of piracy by sending a message that it's not acceptable

    "This affects our business and it's the wrong thing to do," he said. "If we can even start to make a dent in this from an awareness point of view, then we are on the right track."

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to nobodyspecial For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    224
    Satfix Buxs
    2,129
    Thanks
    41
    Thanked 97x in 49 Posts

    Default

    i saw that today too what about Walmart i think they sell android boxes lol

    this is like before pot was legal. head shops sold pipes and what you did with it is on you.
    im sure all android boxes can play netflx or hulu or you tube so that makes them legal.

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to android fun For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    23
    Satfix Buxs
    62
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 7x in 6 Posts

    Default

    McDonald estimates Super Channel loses about $12 million a year from subscribers who turn to piracy.
    Just because the box is capable doesn't mean they are watching stupid channel. That is far fetched BS , they must be having cash flow problems. lol

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Imsomebody For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    823
    Satfix Buxs
    8,285
    Thanks
    8,387
    Thanked 1,792x in 618 Posts

    Default

    Interesting that they've included customers in the lawsuit.

  8. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    528
    Satfix Buxs
    1,559
    Thanks
    8,107
    Thanked 1,309x in 454 Posts

    Default

    as for customers being on the list remember DTV demanded and for the most part got $10,000 until a Judge made them stop

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    528
    Satfix Buxs
    1,559
    Thanks
    8,107
    Thanked 1,309x in 454 Posts

    Default

    i wonder if those boxes would have worked in the States?? if so where do i get one? gee where have i been lately. i could use it to replace my Pansat

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    577
    Satfix Buxs
    7,605
    Thanks
    398
    Thanked 462x in 229 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fn59 View Post
    Interesting that they've included customers in the lawsuit.

    They listed John Does not any specific customers by real names because they don't have any. They do this in case later on they get real names, addresses then they can insert the names in place of the John Does.



    GS2

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    577
    Satfix Buxs
    7,605
    Thanks
    398
    Thanked 462x in 229 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gates07 View Post
    as for customers being on the list remember DTV demanded and for the most part got $10,000 until a Judge made them stop

    Fine amounts would be far less in Canada. Not sure it would be worth their time to file actual lawsuits. They could try demand letters if they get customer lists.



    GS2

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Gunsmoke2 - GS2 For This Useful Post:


  13. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    577
    Satfix Buxs
    7,605
    Thanks
    398
    Thanked 462x in 229 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Imsomebody View Post
    Just because the box is capable doesn't mean they are watching stupid channel. That is far fetched BS , they must be having cash flow problems. lol

    Its an argument for Court for damages. One that has been used before. The court usually always accepts it. Back in 1997 in a lawsuit with ExpressVU as a plaintiff they were suing some large retailers in Canada selling US DTV systems like Price Costco, London Drugs similar to this. ExpressVu hadn't even launched their system and the Court accepted their damage claim.


    "ExpressVu has suffered loss or damage and will continue to do so unless present practices are dramatically altered. Even though ExpressVu has not yet commenced to offer a DBS service, there was no doubt that the activities of Norsat, the retailers to whom it sells, the purchasers from those retailers and those who facilitate those purchasers in activating their decoders continue to occupy an increasing share of the Canadian market for DBS services. And the evidence showed that the other plaintiffs have suffered some loss or damage by reason of the fact that programming to which they have exclusive rights in all or part of Canada by virtue of licences from copyright holders is being received and viewed in Canada without their authorization.

    statutes and regulations judicially considered"


    GS2

  14. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9,757
    Satfix Buxs
    1,248,169,623,823
    Thanks
    3,462
    Thanked 11,767x in 5,594 Posts
    Items DevilBeef
Gift received at 01-24-2014, 04:26 PM from swanner
Message: Thanks for Your Input, with all the Hot Heads around.. Should be cooked in No Time..LOLDish
Gift received at 12-15-2013, 09:10 PM from holly2012
Message: From an Old FriendDog
Gift received at 10-30-2013, 12:15 AM from Just_angel
Message: love chloe xoxoxWhiskey
Gift received at 03-27-2013, 03:33 PM from thebeav
Message: found this behind the dumpster at the casino when i was looking for W H :)Heart
Gift received at 11-20-2012, 12:22 PM from Just_angel
Message: x0x0A Beer
Gift received at 11-06-2012, 03:58 AM from Styx_N_Stones
Message: I seem to have accumulated too many beers... LOL!Crown Royal
Gift received at 10-11-2012, 03:49 PM from Just_angel

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2 View Post
    Its an argument for Court for damages. One that has been used before. The court usually always accepts it. Back in 1997 in a lawsuit with ExpressVU as a plaintiff they were suing some large retailers in Canada selling US DTV systems like Price Costco, London Drugs similar to this. ExpressVu hadn't even launched their system and the Court accepted their damage claim.






    GS2
    that's comparing apples to oranges

    DODGE the father

    RAM the daughter



    “Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut.”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •