Canadian Supreme Court Says Linking to Defamatory Information Is Not Considered Publishing and Therefore Legal – Replace “Defamatory Information” with “Torrents” And We Got Ourselves a Precedent for Legal File-Sharing in Canada, Folks! Yeehaw!

One day in 2006, Vancouver businessman Wayne Crookes got mad at some blogs. Claiming the sites had defamed his character, he filed suit against the offending blogs as well as a number of other websites, including giants like Google, MySpace, and Wikipedia, claiming these big boys allowed users to anonymously post slanderous comments. But Crookes didn’t stop there. For his douche-de-grace, Crookes sued news focused file-sharing site P2Pnet for linking to the alleged defamatory content. Hmm, I wonder why people felt the need to libel him in the first place? He seems like such a swell fellow.

According to TorrentFreak, the British-Columbia Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of P2Pnet, determining that linking to defamatory information is not the same as publishing it, which clears P2Pnet since material must be published in order to prove defamation. Not only is this a fantastic decision for free speech, but also for everybody’s favorite hobby -- getting free shit off the internet. Since most BitTorrent sites only link to files and publish nothing on the site itself, this case could stand as an effective precedent reference against potential file-sharing suits.

So, enjoy your landmark case, Canada. I’ll be here in America, hiding under my desk hoping our fucking copyright czar doesn’t catch me downloading High School Musical 3. Sure, I could go to the theater, but I prefer to get my Zac Efron fix in private... Seriously, his eyes are like little pools of eternity.

Most Read