Columbia Pictures Industries Inc. v. Gaudreault

Columbia Pictures Industries Inc. v. Gaudreault

The motion judge did not err: the appellants failed to put the criminal record required by s.18(3) before the civil court (a Crown brief is not the record of proceedings), the appellants' affidavit evidence was insufficiently specific to establish as a matter of law that the respondent engaged in conduct contrary to ss.9 or 10, and as a matter of law unauthorized decoding is not necessarily a copyright infringement and the sale of decoding devices with warnings rebuts an inference of authorization of infringement; accordingly summary judgment was properly denied and the appeal dismissed.

Citation
2006 FCA 29
Parties
Appellants: Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. et al.; Respondent: Serge Gaudreault
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Damages Action Under the Radiocommunication Act and Claim Under the Copyright Act; Appeal From Dismissal of Plaintiffs' Summary Judgment Motion / Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal From Dismissal of Summary Judgment Motion in Federal Court (motion Judge: Hugessen J.)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; motion judge's dismissal of summary judgment affirmed.
Legal Topics
Unauthorized Decoding, Radiocommunication Act S.18(1) and S.18(3), Summary Judgment, Authorization of Copyright Infringement, Evidentiary Effect of Guilty Pleas, Canada Evidence Act S.12(2)
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Telecommunications Law Evidence Civil Procedure Statutory Interpretation Unauthorized Decoding Radiocommunication Act S.18(1) and S.18(3) Summary Judgment +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. et al.

Appellants

Serge Gaudreault

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Damages Action Under the Radiocommunication Act and Claim Under the Copyright Act; Appeal From Dismissal of Plaintiffs' Summary Judgment Motion / Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal From Dismissal of Summary Judgment Motion in Federal Court (motion Judge: Hugessen J.)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motion judge erred in dismissing the appellants' summary judgment motion
  2. 2 Whether a criminal guilty plea or criminal record proves civil liability under s.18(3) of the Radiocommunication Act
  3. 3 Whether unauthorized decoding of encrypted signals is, as a matter of law, copyright infringement

Ratio Decidendi

The motion judge did not err: the appellants failed to put the criminal record required by s.18(3) before the civil court (a Crown brief is not the record of proceedings), the appellants' affidavit evidence was insufficiently specific to establish as a matter of law that the respondent engaged in conduct contrary to ss.9 or 10, and as a matter of law unauthorized decoding is not necessarily a copyright infringement and the sale of decoding devices with warnings rebuts an inference of authorization of infringement; accordingly summary judgment was properly denied and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; motion judge's dismissal of summary judgment affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
  • Order below dismissing plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is affirmed