Article content continued

“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 judge 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.