said by 04193189:NOT a "freeman on the land" ,, not even close.
I did not give consent to any such thing by visiting a website as it's not first thing posted at the start of website ... if the page loads at all with all that code garbage, java script, picture garbage ... on my 486 laptop [which i use for testing websites, as many network analysts do]
no agreement, no accept button to press, no deal .. therefore Teksavvy is fully liable
I know where those words come from and can you please examine at what you actually write. Your concerned with google/nsa spying on you causing monetary loss or something else. What next your going to impose a fee schedule of $1,000,000 everytime this happens?
What is teksavvy actually liable for? First off I think its common sense to say that the internet is govt property all the DNS servers, fiber, everything layed out so I can communicate with you is govt property. The only thing that might not be is your personal computer. In addition all ISP's in the entire world are govt corporations so why would you even be on the internet knowing that everything on the internet is govt owned by civil law?
Teksavvy a corporation cannot assume any liability unless they break Canada's civil law or common law; breaking into and destroying your computer. In addition seeing that its a corporation of Canada if your looking for damages your looking at the wrong corporation to seek relief from b/c the individual who owns the estate of Canada that being the Queen aka the sovereign and she is the one at fault.
If you want to continue this tom foolery with no backings I suggest you write up a notice to her majesty seeking relief against such persons or corporations under her control, oh and don't forget to get it signed by a notary republic.
And for anyone who asks based on my prior post I do not follow freeman on the land b/c what they fail to examine all evidence, kind of like this guy. There's a lot of BS stuff out there, lots of that so called conspiracy stuff which I do follow is fear mongering. It really is simple examine all the evidence, hide your emotions, come to a logical conclusion based upon the evidence, and go with your gut. Not what some guy claims is right and most importantly get facts.
Facts is something written or some evidence that is not theory. Therefore upon giving evidence it is factual b/c that information forms a binding upon two parties; unless there is an emotional reason as to why not.