Just a question on kodi

Kane84

New member
Mar 10, 2014
49
0
0
I'm just wondering because I keep getting mixed answers from friends.What is the current status of using kodi in Canada for streaming live tv is it legal ?
 

RavRob

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 21, 2012
6,590
60
48
The Halls of Valhalla
Nothing that will play copyrighted content (content that you don't own) is legal. In Canada, however, it is mostly overlooked and no one was ever charged for simply streaming such content. That being said, no one know what the future holds.
 

Kane84

New member
Mar 10, 2014
49
0
0
Ok now because I am so out of the kodi scene and want to start fresh what addons can I use and how do I use a vnp on my streamer which ones are reccomanded
 

RavRob

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 21, 2012
6,590
60
48
The Halls of Valhalla
Best I can tell you is that a few devs have gone out of the scene the last week or so. For now, I am not sure what addons are left that are working. You might want to google that part.
As for a VPN, I would recommend do your homework. Many have a week or so as a free trial. Give any of those a shot over the run of a few days see if that is what you are looking for. Also contact their support. A good VPN is nothing without support. Once you find one you like you can decide to go for it or not.
 

JimDaddyO

New member
May 15, 2016
23
0
1
The copyright laws in Canada state that you cannot record, release, or otherwise BROADCAST copyright material. If you are receiving a stream, and not recording it, THAT is not covered under the law in Canada and is therefore legal.
 

Kane84

New member
Mar 10, 2014
49
0
0
Ok thanks about that info on the law him daddy o I tried googling that but didn't get much info so since I have never recorded but just streamed content could you give any good addons
 

RavRob

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 21, 2012
6,590
60
48
The Halls of Valhalla
The copyright laws in Canada state that you cannot record, release, or otherwise BROADCAST copyright material. If you are receiving a stream, and not recording it, THAT is not covered under the law in Canada and is therefore legal.
Unless you are an actual lawyer, I wouldn't disseminate this info as truth. Just look at the lawsuit against FTA. Ppl were saying the same thing back then but that didn't hold water in court. This could be argued as different but really, is it?
 

JimDaddyO

New member
May 15, 2016
23
0
1
I could....but not on this forum. It's not allowed. Google, You Tube, and patience researching are your tools of choice.
 

JimDaddyO

New member
May 15, 2016
23
0
1
Canadian Copyright Law
Sub-section 3(1) of the Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1985 c. C-42 (the “Act”) defines copyright as “the sole right to produce or reproduce the work or any substantial part thereof in any material form whatever, [and] to perform the work or any substantial part thereof in public”, including the right in paragraph 3(1)(f) “to communicate the work to the public by telecommunication”. Sub-section 27(1) of the Act makes it an infringement to do anything that only the owner of the copyright has the right to do. The Supreme Court of Canada (the “SCC”) has decided several cases in recent years that provide some guidance as to what activities carried out over the Internet infringe copyright under these provisions.

In Entertainment Software Association v Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, 2012 SCC 34, the SCC ruled that downloading a video game containing musical works is not a communication to the public of those musical works by telecommunication under paragraph 3(1)(f) of the Act. The court held that communication to the public under paragraph 3(1)(f) does not include delivering a durable copy of the work, because this paragraph is merely an example of the right to perform the work in public. Thus, while the download of a durable copy of a work implicates the right to reproduce the work, it does not implicate the right to perform the work in public.

In the companion case Rogers v Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, 2012 SCC 35, the court held that paragraph 3(1)(f) can include a series of repeated point-to-point transmissions of a stream of the same work to numerous different recipients. Thus, the right to perform a work in public includes the right to post files to the Internet so that third parties can stream those works. This is so even where the individual transmission of each stream is triggered by individual users rather than the person who made the file available for streaming. Such communications can be viewed as “pull” communications initiated by individual users, rather than “push” communications more traditionally associated with the right to perform the work in public, such as radio or television broadcasts. That communications where a user pulls the communication to themselves, rather than having the person who made the work available push the communication out to the user, fall within the scope of paragraph 3(1)(f) has been further reinforced by the coming into force of the Copyright Modernization Act, S.C. 2012, c. 20, which added sub-section 2.4(1.1) to the Act. This sub-section clarifies that communication of a work or other subject-matter to the public by telecommunication includes making it available to the public by telecommunication in a way that allows a member of the public to have access to it from a place and at a time of their choosing.

Thus, uploading a copyrighted work for download by members of the public over the Internet, or making a copyrighted work available over the Internet so that members of the public can receive a stream of that work over the Internet, infringes copyright. The entity that provides members of the public with unauthorized access to copyrighted works, whether by making those works available for download or for streaming, infringes copyright. A member of the public who downloads a durable copy of a copyrighted work from such an unauthorized service provider also infringes the copyright owner’s exclusive right to reproduce that work.

However, whether a member of the public who merely receives a stream of a copyrighted work from such an unauthorized service provider infringes copyright is less clear. Under sub-section 3(1), including paragraph 3(1)(f), the exclusive right granted to the copyright owner is to perform the work in public, including by communicating it to the public. The copyright owner is not granted an exclusive right to control who receives a performance of the copyrighted work. Thus, a user who merely receives a stream of a copyrighted work could argue that they do not directly infringe copyright, because they are not engaging in any act that the copyright owner has an exclusive right to do.

This analysis is complicated by the practical realities of how TV streaming devices operate. In practice, when content is streamed over the Internet, a user’s computer will make a local copy (i.e. “reproduction”) of that file on the user’s computer. This local copy could be considered to be a substantial reproduction of the copyrighted work, which would infringe the copyright owner’s sole right to reproduce the work, unless some exception to infringement provided by the Act applies.

The SCC has also considered the issue of whether temporary copies infringe copyright, albeit in the context of broadcasting operations. The court held in Bishop v Stevens, [1990] 2 SCR 467, that the right to broadcast a performance under sub-section 3(1) of the Act does not include the right to make ephemeral recordings beforehand for the purpose of facilitating the broadcast. Thus, the public performance right and the reproduction right granted under sub-section 3(1) of the Act had to be separately licensed to carry out the broadcasting without infringing copyright. This proposition was recently affirmed in Canadian Broadcasting Corporation v SODRAC 2003 Inc, 2015 SCC 57. These rulings mean that even non-permanent reproductions, like those made while streaming a file, could constitute copyright infringement, unless there is a specific provision in the Act that authorizes such reproductions.

There are numerous exceptions to infringement included in the Act, including section 30.71 covering temporary reproductions necessary for technological processes. Section 30.71 reads:

30.71 It is not an infringement of copyright to make a reproduction of a work or other subject-matter if

(a) the reproduction forms an essential part of a technological process;
(b) the reproduction’s only purpose is to facilitate a use that is not an infringement of copyright; and
(c) the reproduction exists only for the duration of the technological process.
This is most likely the section that many commentators and device providers are relying upon to support the assertion that streaming of copyrighted content is legal in Canada, since any temporary copy of a streamed work on a user’s local computer is arguably made as part of the technological process of streaming the work. However, there are three requirements that a user must meet to rely on section 30.71, including that the only purpose of the reproduction is to facilitate a non-infringing use.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Video Addons 1
K Kodi Support 1
M Kodi Support 1