‘The whole experience was horrifying,’
August 2, 2017 5:51 PM Subscribe
Cable giants step up piracy battle by interrogating Montreal software developer and searching his home: According to court documents, the group stayed for 16 hours and the plaintiffs' lawyer and independent counsel interrogated Lackman for more than nine hours. He was given a break for dinner and to speak to his lawyer, who was present.
Lackman was "not permitted to refuse to answer questions" and his lawyer wasn't permitted to counsel him in his answers.
"Any time I would question the process, they would threaten me with contempt of court proceedings," says Lackman.
Internet indicates that Canada has no right against self incrimination but compelled testimony can't be used against you in court, so...this all sounds legal, and maybe it's because I depose people all the time, but this isn't particularly Orwellian to me.
I can't imagine what would have taken nine hours, though.
posted by radicalawyer at 6:14 PM on August 2, 2017
I can't imagine what would have taken nine hours, though.
posted by radicalawyer at 6:14 PM on August 2, 2017
Internet indicates that Canada has no right against self incrimination but compelled testimony can't be used against you in court, so...this all sounds legal, and maybe it's because I depose people all the time, but this isn't particularly Orwellian to me.
I can't imagine what would have taken nine hours, though.
They were too polite to terrify him any quicker?
posted by Samizdata at 6:53 PM on August 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
I can't imagine what would have taken nine hours, though.
They were too polite to terrify him any quicker?
posted by Samizdata at 6:53 PM on August 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
radicallawyer, if you're in the US, I doubt your depositions are conducted forcibly and without notice, at a time of your choosing, in the deponent's home, concurrent with the execution of a search warrant, and without benefit of advice of counsel.
I was unaware that Canada also allows private prosecution, but I suppose it makes sense, being an English thing, that Canada would also have similar mechanisms. Quite disturbing to the sensibilities of those of us from the US. (Ironic, I know, given the reputation of our own legal system)
posted by wierdo at 7:09 PM on August 2, 2017 [10 favorites]
I was unaware that Canada also allows private prosecution, but I suppose it makes sense, being an English thing, that Canada would also have similar mechanisms. Quite disturbing to the sensibilities of those of us from the US. (Ironic, I know, given the reputation of our own legal system)
posted by wierdo at 7:09 PM on August 2, 2017 [10 favorites]
Yeah, this strikes me (an American, admittedly) more as "home invasion by a vengeful corporate entity" than "deposition". Staying in the guy's home uninvited for SIXTEEN HOURS while preventing him from speaking to his lawyer during the actual interrogation really makes this seem more like a brutish intimidation tactic than any kind of legitimate legal proceeding.
posted by IAmUnaware at 8:27 PM on August 2, 2017 [12 favorites]
posted by IAmUnaware at 8:27 PM on August 2, 2017 [12 favorites]
IANAL, but more on Anton Piller orders (used against Lackman and later - too little too late - ruled unlawful in this instance) and here's the Supreme Court of Canada decision that's used as the test for them.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 8:33 PM on August 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 8:33 PM on August 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
I once executed an Anton Piller order in Australia in search of counterfeit toys. It was a pretty odd experience to turn up at a suburban home at 8am with a court order, and proceed search through someone's cupboards and drawers. (The guy answered the door wrapped in a duvet and very little else; I'm not sure which of us was more uncomfortable about the whole thing.)
The requirements for obtaining an ex parte search order seem much the same in Canada as Australia, and they're generally pretty difficult to establish. As with Canada, the search also has to be supervised by an independent lawyer who is supposed to act as a neutral officer of the court, explaining the process to the respondent, making sure that the search (and any questioning) is conducted in a proper manner, and taking custody of any evidence seized - I have got to say that 16 hours sounds like an abuse of process to me.
posted by a very present absence at 7:33 AM on August 3, 2017 [3 favorites]
The requirements for obtaining an ex parte search order seem much the same in Canada as Australia, and they're generally pretty difficult to establish. As with Canada, the search also has to be supervised by an independent lawyer who is supposed to act as a neutral officer of the court, explaining the process to the respondent, making sure that the search (and any questioning) is conducted in a proper manner, and taking custody of any evidence seized - I have got to say that 16 hours sounds like an abuse of process to me.
posted by a very present absence at 7:33 AM on August 3, 2017 [3 favorites]
I may be viewing this through the jaundiced lens of someone who thinks that nobody who is smart enough to develop the product that he did is also dumb enough not to realize that Canada's RIAA/MPAA equivalent was going to come at him and hard. So his shrieking seems a bit contrived.
posted by radicalawyer at 8:43 AM on August 3, 2017
posted by radicalawyer at 8:43 AM on August 3, 2017
I'm not sure which of us was more uncomfortable about the whole thing.I'm pretty sure it was him, not you. I suspect you know this, because he was at home asleep and you were a party deliberately invading that home early in the morning.
posted by uberchet at 9:42 AM on August 3, 2017 [4 favorites]
"I'm pretty sure it was him, not you."
Yeah, I'm not so sure; he seemed strangely unfazed by the process. (Whereas I was nervous as hell, never having done such a search before.)
posted by a very present absence at 5:05 PM on August 3, 2017
Yeah, I'm not so sure; he seemed strangely unfazed by the process. (Whereas I was nervous as hell, never having done such a search before.)
posted by a very present absence at 5:05 PM on August 3, 2017
@radicalawyer If I'm not mistaken, he's just the founder of tvaddons.org, a website explaining how to install Kodi add-ons that allow you to watch movies, shows and live-tv for free.
In other words, he operated a website. The site did not host illegal content, it only published explained how you could obtain illegal content.
I guess he just believed no-one would think they'd have a case against him.
posted by Captain Fetid at 8:38 AM on August 4, 2017
In other words, he operated a website. The site did not host illegal content, it only published explained how you could obtain illegal content.
I guess he just believed no-one would think they'd have a case against him.
posted by Captain Fetid at 8:38 AM on August 4, 2017
An Anton Piller order is the nuclear weapon of civil litigation, with powers similar to a law enforcement search warrant. While the order would have allowed the search to occur, I don't think they would have been able to compel his testimony, at least as I understand the law in Australia, and the second part of the article suggests this is the case in Canada too.
If I had to read between the lines, perhaps Lackman's lawyer suggested they give the searchers enough rope to hang themselves and get the whole of the evidence collected ruled out. Otherwise, I can't imagine why his lawyer didn't just tell him to keep his mouth shut.
posted by bystander at 2:48 PM on August 7, 2017
If I had to read between the lines, perhaps Lackman's lawyer suggested they give the searchers enough rope to hang themselves and get the whole of the evidence collected ruled out. Otherwise, I can't imagine why his lawyer didn't just tell him to keep his mouth shut.
posted by bystander at 2:48 PM on August 7, 2017
« Older "1000 crickets for thirty bucks. I think that's a... | Resistance Rising Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by thecjm at 6:13 PM on August 2, 2017 [3 favorites]