CRIA, lawsuits and contorted truth

I just finished reading over an Ars Technica article regarding the copyright situation in Canada. The title? “Canadian labels: We get “absolutely zero credit” for not suing fans.”

From the article,

He points out that Canadian labels have not chosen to sue their fans, but then goes plaintive for a moment, saying, “We get absolutely zero credit for that.”

The problem is that CRIA did chose to sue their fans. They sued twenty nine of them but the case failed. This isn’t the first time that Graham Henderson has given a similar denial either.

How is this quotation truthful? Maybe labels didn’t chose to sue, but CRIA did so without representing them? Maybe he misspoke and meant to say that “labels chose not to sue after our failed attempt”? Did Nate misquoted him?

In any case, CRIA deserves no credit for not suing fans. I’m only grateful that they haven’t managed to do so on the scale of the RIAA and stopped after their first lawsuit.