I've received daily emails from people who have been sent a copyright infringement notification as part of Canada's notice-and-notice system. While I'm unable to provide specific legal advice, I can provide more information that may assist in making an informed decision about a system that was designed to discourage infringement.
According to Mashable, Aaron Swartz may have been a source for Wikileaks. If looked at in light of the U.S. vendetta against Wikileaks, their extreme overreaction to Swartz's "copyright violations" involving academic journals suddenly makes sense. The Government's response to Wikileaks has been nothing less than rabid.
More than ten years of contentious debate over Canadian copyright law appeared to come to a conclusion in late June when Bill C-11 passed its final legislative hurdle and received royal assent. Yet despite characterizing the bill as a "vital building block," the copyright lobby that pressured the government to impose restrictive rules on digital locks and tougher penalties for copyright infringement is already demanding further reforms that include rolling back many key aspects of the original bill.
The House of Commons may have passed Bill C-11, but the constitutional concerns with the copyright bill and its digital lock rules will likely linger for years. Many experts believe that the government's decision to adopt one of the most restrictive digital lock approaches in the world. And guess what? It's vulnerable to constitutional challenge.
While everyone is opposed to counterfeiting, the CACN is pushing for a massive public investment into private enforcement matters at the very time when the evidence suggests Canada already has strong legal rules against counterfeiting and a clear commitment from law enforcement to take appropriate action.