加拿大华人论坛 加拿大房产远离Bomanite Toronto Inc. +版权违规被判赔偿45000.
在加拿大
请了一个做Interlock的公司， 做concrete interlock.
估价后列出了包含的内容， 也说好了做好后的面积，多退少补。
也讲好做三个小的种花的墙。
1 开工延迟， 说好夏天开工， 结果到了秋天才开始。
2 实际开工当天，就翻脸不认人了。去除杂草不管，挪石头不管， 小的花墙做不了。说好的改动，最后完工发来上万的没有签字的invoice。
3 设计的图纸，发现跟house的survey竟然不同！ 形状都不同， 你的面积跟价格怎么计算出来的？
后来完工后，不承认面积缺少，嘴里不干净罢了， 最后自己打脸请了个surevey公司来测量，少了足足600SF。
按照15/sf 那是多少钱？！
4 不到一年时间，concrete的地面各种开裂，联系他们保修的时候就不管了。说合同里面说了因为天气问题的开裂或者颜色问题， 不管。 说白了就是基本没有warranty。
5 各种脏话F words. 从老板到员工，讨论问题都能说出F words. 真没见过。
6 最近这个公司更是被另外一个公司告了，侵犯版权！被要求支付45000的赔偿！今年7.27日
http://www.ippractice.ca/file-browser/?fileno=T-1845-17
Patterned Concrete ... commenced an action for copyright infringement alleging that its competitor, Bomanite, infringed the copyright subsisting in a quotation form, a contract form, and a limited warranty certificate used in connection with Patterned Concrete’s business. Patterned Concrete now moves for summary judgment in its favour on all issues of copyright infringement raised in the action, alleging there are no genuine issues that would require a trial. ... In my view, P.S. Knight (2018 FCA 222) does not establish a rule that section 53 of the Copyright Act will only apply if a certificate of registration was obtained in the ordinary course of business, and not in contemplation of litigation. ... In my view, a side-by-side comparison of the two sets of forms demonstrates substantial similarity between Bomanite’s forms and the Works, in content and in the format. ... In my view, Bomanite has failed to establish that the elements of similarity were due to a commonality of terms rather than copied from Patterned Concrete’s forms, or independently created. ... I consider an award of $8,000 per work, for a total statutory damages award of $24,000, to be a just result and a reasonable assessment in view of all of the circumstances of the case.
Following my judgment and reasons reported at Patterned Concrete Mississauga Inc v Bomanite Toronto Ltd, 2021 FC 314, granting Patterned Concrete Mississauga Inc.’s (Patterned Concrete) motion for summary judgment and deciding the issues in this copyright infringement action, the parties provided written submissions on costs and on pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. These are my reasons and order on costs and interest related to the motion and the action. ... Based on the foregoing, I find that a lump sum fee award should be lower than the “trend” of 25%-50% referred to in the case law, to reflect a level of uncertainty regarding the reasonableness of the legal fees that Patterned Concrete actually incurred. Party?and-party fees calculated under column V of the Tariff, equate to about 15% of Patterned Concrete’s legal fees actually incurred, and I have kept that amount in mind arriving at a lump sum cost award that I believe to be reasonable. In my view, a lump sum fee award of $45,000 inclusive of HST, which would represent less than 20% of total fees incurred by Patterned Concrete, is an appropriate fee award in the circumstances of this case.
找找其他公司，避免踩雷！！！！
·中文新闻 驻扎在北端地区的日本军队向中国发出明确信息
·中文新闻 Bluesky：社交媒体网站吸引了大量当地 X 难民
