TORONTO - A Canadian Internet service provider has been ordered to hand over the names and addresses of about 2,000 customers who allegedly downloaded movies online.

A Federal Court decision released Thursday compels Ontario-based TekSavvy to identify the customers allegedly linked to downloads of films by the U.S. production company Voltage Pictures, which is behind the likes of "The Hurt Locker," "Dallas Buyers Club" and "Don Jon."

As a result, those TekSavvy customers could eventually receive a letter from Voltage threatening legal action. Under the federal Copyright Act, statutory damages for non-commercial infringement range between $100 and $5,000.

"It's going to be up to the courts to decide what the appropriate penalty is," said Voltage's lawyer James Zibarras, who called the court decision "great" and "well balanced."

"I think to date rightsholders' interests have been ignored and really what this does is adjust the pendulum a bit.

"Obviously the public has almost become accustomed to downloading movies for free and it's being done on a massive scale. And of course the public loves justifying what they're doing and when someone tries to stop it they invariably want to come up with arguments as to why it should not be stopped."

But while the court sided with Voltage's efforts to go after copyright violators, it sought to protect against the company acting "inappropriately in the enforcement of its rights to the detriment of innocent Internet users."

"On the facts of this case, there is some evidence that Voltage has been engaged in litigation which may have an improper purpose. However, the evidence is not sufficiently compelling for this court at this juncture in the proceeding to make any definitive determination of the motive of Voltage," wrote prothonotary Kevin Aalto.

Aalto ordered that before Voltage can send a letter to the alleged downloaders, it must return to court to get the wording of its communications cleared by a case management judge.

"In order to ensure there is no inappropriate language in any demand letter sent to the alleged infringers, the draft demand letter will be provided to the court for review," Aalto wrote.

"Any correspondence sent by Voltage to any subscriber shall clearly state in bold type that no court has yet made a determination that such subscriber has infringed or is liable in any way for payment of damages."

Voltage was also ordered to pay any costs that TekSavvy incurs in identifying the customers in the case, as well as legal fees.

The Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic, which had intervenor status in the case, said it was "quite pleased" with the decision and expected Voltage wouldn't see any financial incentive in going after downloaders, particularly since it must pay TekSavvy's "substantial" costs.

CIPPIC director David Fewer said his read of the decision is that the court would not be eager to assign penalties at the higher range of what the Copyright Act allows.

"If Voltage is asking for figures in excess of ($100) I think the court is going to shut them down pretty darn quickly," Fewer said.

"And if that's the case I think Voltage is done because this is no longer a viable business model. And that's what the whole copyright troll thing is about, it's about using the court process to get settlements that are in excess of what you could get for (actual) damages to scare people into settling."

Fewer said he was happy that the court will vet any letters that Voltage sends to alleged copyright offenders, since they're typically designed to scare people into settling a case.

"A lot of people just pay the settlement rather than deal with the uncertainty and the anxiety of the claim — and the model is predicated on that," he said.

"Certain people are risk averse and it's cheaper to settle rather than to hire a lawyer to deal with it, even if you are innocent."

null

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • Women Sue For Being Called 'Hot', Pictured With 'Douchebags'

    Last October, Yvette Gorzelany, Joanna Obiedzinski, and Paulina Pakos attempted to sue over their appearance in the book "Hot Chicks with Douchebags." The ladies filed a defamation suit only to have it thrown out by a New Jersey judge in February who ruled it as a work of satire (duh). The judge proved the point further by asking whether a reasonable person could "believe that Jean-Paul Sartre stated 'man is condemned to be douchey because once thrown into the world he is responsible for every douchey thing that he does.'" Yeah, we're with the judge on that one. (<a href="http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0210091douche1.html">source</a>)

  • Beer Commercial Promises Women, Doesn't Deliver

    It would take a lot of beer to believe this guy's story. In 1991 Richard Overton actually tried to sue Anheuser-Busch for $10,000 because upon drinking copious amounts of Bud Light, beautiful women didn't come to life in a tropical setting, as shown in the commercials. Guess what Richard? Frogs and lizards can't <em>really</em> talk, either. (<a href="http://listverse.com">source</a>)

  • Sick Of Being A Celebrity Doppelganger? Sue!

    Oregon man Allen Heckard had a unique problem: people constantly told him he looked like basketball star Michael Jordan. Except Heckard saw it a bit differently, Michael Jordan looked like <em>him</em>. Naturally, he decided to sue Jordan and Nike for $832 million for his "emotional pain and suffering." But we thought everyone wanted to "be like Mike"?! (<a href="http://www.nydailynews.com">source</a>)

  • Lindsay Lohan Sues For Depiction Of "Milkaholic" Baby

    This year, Lindsay Lohan sought $100 million from E-Trade for use of the name "Lindsay" in reference to a female baby in their Super Bowl ad. Her people claimed the public knows her by the singular name, like Oprah or Madonna, and that referring to the baby as a "milk-aholic" directly references her life. We think she should be FINED $100 million just for being so vain. (<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/09/lindsay-lohan-suing-etrad_n_491298.html">source</a>)

  • Broke? In Prison? Sue Yourself!

    In 1995, Robert Lee Brock attempted to sue himself for $5 million claiming he violated his own civil rights by getting intoxicated and committing crimes. He was serving a 23 year prison sentence at the time and thought the state would have to pay because he was incarcerated. Not hard to believe, the case was thrown out. (<a href="http://www.the-injury-lawyer-directory.com/ridiculous_lawsuits.html">source</a>)

  • Haunted House Too Scary? Here's $15,000!

    Usually haunted houses get points for being scary, but in the 2000 case of Cleanthi Peters, scariness got Universal Studios a $15,000 lawsuit. Peters claimed to have suffered "extreme fear, mental anguish, and emotional distress" after visiting the Halloween Horror Nights haunted house. Maybe she could use some of that money to learn what "haunted house" means. (<a href="http://www.the-injury-lawyer-directory.com/ridiculous_lawsuits.html">source</a>)

  • $100,000 For A Leg Cramp?

    We've all wanted to sue an airline for awful food, uncomfortable seats, or longer-than-life wait times, but this couple actually did it. Jerome and Judith O'Callaghan sued American Airlines for $100,000 in 2004 because the leg room was smaller than they expected. (<a href="http://www.oddee.com/item_96614.aspx">source</a>)

  • Kidney "Donation" Ends In $1.5 M Lawsuit

    When a Long Island doctor (yes, DOCTOR) was served with divorce papers by his cheating wife, he naturally decided to sue her for the return of a gift he gave her 8 years prior: his kidney. Yes, a medical professional put a price of $1.5 million on the body part, to be paid by his ex. At least he didn't want it back! (<a href="http://www.oddee.com/item_96614.aspx">source</a>)

  • Victoria's REAL Secret: Defective Merchandise?

    52-year-old L.A. traffic cop Macrida Patterson sued Victoria's Secret after a thong she purchased there broke. The underwear had a rhinestone heart on the side that broke, flew into Macrida's eye and hurt her. We're not sure if Victoria's Secret made a defective thong, or whether Macrida just needs to buy bigger underwear. (<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/19/macrida-patterson-talks-a_n_108068.html">source</a>)

  • Women Using Urinals Causes "Emotional Distress"

    In 1995, Robert Glaser entered at unisex bathroom at a Billy Joel/Elton John concert and found not one, but multiple women using urinals in lieu of the toilets. Glaser sued the venue for $5.4 million for his "emotional distress" and lost. At least he got a good story out of it. (<a href="http://www.nydailynews.com">source</a>)

  • This Lawsuit Is What's "Unreasonable"

    (<a href="http://wordsaboutthings.files.wordpress.com">image</a>) Zeynep Inanli is suing Starbucks for serving her tea that was "unreasonably hot." She claims the tea gave her second-degree burns and "great physical pain and mental anguish." Yeah, we're sure that's worth millions of dollars, right? (<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/04/starbucks-tea-lawsuit-zey_n_563069.html">source</a>)

  • Man Sues For Damages To Car After RUNNING OVER Boy

    When Tomas Delgado was driving over the speed limit and hit and killed child on a bike, a loophole got him out of any trouble (the boy was riding at night without safety gear or reflectors). You'd think getting away with murder would be enough, but Delgado decided to sue the family of the boy for damages to his Audi. It's a good thing he later dropped the lawsuit, or we would have lost ALL faith in humanity. (<a href="http://www.paralegaltraining.net/blog/15-crazy-lawsuits">source</a>)

  • Not Dressed For The Weather? There's A Lawsuit For That

    In 1996 an Israeli woman sued a TV station for predicting fair weather, prompting her to dress lightly and be rained upon later that day. She asked for $1000 for her resulting sickness which caused her to miss work. We don't know what's more strange: the fact that she actually sued over an act of nature, or the fact that she won. (<a href="http://listverse.com/2009/01/28/top-10-bizarre-or-frivolous-lawsuits/">source</a>).

  • Man Accuses Magicians Of Using His Powers

    Christopher Roller is just a regular Minnesota resident. Well, except that he thinks he's a god. Roller got upset after seeing David Copperfield and David Blaine do their magic tricks, and sued both magicians for use of his "godly powers." So not only does this man think he's holy, but that his holy duty is to perform card tricks and faux levitation? Awesome. (<a href="http://www.paralegaltraining.net/blog/15-crazy-lawsuits">source</a>)

  • Red Hot Lawsuit Over 'Californication'

    In 2007, The Red Hot Chili Peppers filed a lawsuit against Showtime over use of the name "Californication" for their series starring David Duchovny. Sure, it was the name of the band's 1999 album and hit song, but unless the show is about rocking out in underwear or doing drugs under a bridge, we don't see the problem. (<a href="http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1574710/20071120/red_hot_chili_peppers.jhtml">source</a>)

  • A $930 Plate Of Cookies

    In the summer of 2005, two teen girls in Colorado decided to bake some cookies and share them with their neighbors. Sounds innocent enough, but one neighbor, Wanita Renea Young, was so shocked at the appearance of two 15-year-old girls on her doorstep at 10:30 p.m. that she had an anxiety attack and sued for medical damages. She won $930 for her trip to the emergency room but was denied money for "pain and suffering." You know what really helps with pain and suffering? Cookies! (<a href="http://www.paralegaltraining.net/blog/15-crazy-lawsuits">source</a>)