dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
26898
share rss forum feed


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Wellington N
reply to FiReSTaRT

Re: New Canadian Bittorrent lawsuit: Who shared "Recoil&quo

quote:
Your IP is clear
This is only demo for random IP from our database
Me too

D_Puckett
Premium
join:2013-02-09
Etobicoke, ON
reply to hm blah

said by hm blah :

:/
.. Is anyone going to be in Montreal tomorrow to see this go down?
Will anyone tweet what's going on?
D_Puckett, can you get anyone there to transcribe this as it goes down?
..

Unfortunately the process is rather anti-climactic. NGN and Riding's counsel notified our counsel that they wish an indeterminate adjournment while they wait to see what happens in the CIPPIC Intervenor motion in the Voltage TS motion. We are not in a position to oppose an adjournment as it is their motion.

For the armchair lawyers out there.. we could try and oppose but we would have a tough time trying to show how our customer's privacy would be harmed by NGN retreating from the table.

So, while if it were proceeding tomorrow AM I was planning on being there, it won't so I won't.


hm

@videotron.ca

said by D_Puckett:

Unfortunately the process is rather anti-climactic. NGN and Riding's counsel notified our counsel that they wish an indeterminate adjournment while they wait to see what happens in the CIPPIC Intervenor motion in the Voltage TS motion. We are not in a position to oppose an adjournment as it is their motion.

For the armchair lawyers out there.. we could try and oppose but we would have a tough time trying to show how our customer's privacy would be harmed by NGN retreating from the table.

So, while if it were proceeding tomorrow AM I was planning on being there, it won't so I won't.

Makes sense.

Thanks for keeping us in the loop.


effoff

@electronicbox.net
reply to Content

Sharing is a fundamental right, it demands no financial compensation.



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to hm

Distributel’s Motion record, Lots more detail:

»www.scribd.com/doc/124826637/Mot···-Limited



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to effoff

From Copyright lawyer & Expert (you can read his bio), Howard Knopf:

Distributel Shows & Tells How an Indie ISP can Defend its Customers' Privacy Rights Against Alleged “Copyright Trolling”: Teksavvy Take Note
»excesscopyright.blogspot.ca/2013···isp.html

He is nailing it. And I think he held back.



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to D_Puckett

said by D_Puckett:

Unfortunately the process is rather anti-climactic. NGN and Riding's counsel notified our counsel that they wish an indeterminate adjournment while they wait to see what happens in the CIPPIC Intervenor motion in the Voltage TS motion. We are not in a position to oppose an adjournment as it is their motion.

For the armchair lawyers out there.. we could try and oppose but we would have a tough time trying to show how our customer's privacy would be harmed by NGN retreating from the table.

So, while if it were proceeding tomorrow AM I was planning on being there, it won't so I won't.

Daniel,

Howard Knopf (copyright lawyer) wrote up on the position you are taking. I dropped this URL to him about NGN putting this on hold in his comment area. Refer to the comments in his Distributel blog post:
»excesscopyright.blogspot.ca/2013···isp.html

I'm not 100% sure I follow, but I think he stated you should press ahead. Anyhow he (we) have no way of knowing if you really are who you claim to be. So I'll let you contact him, or not, to set the record straight since the docket isn't updated with this latest info.

Lot's of people support your position.

D_Puckett
Premium
join:2013-02-09
Etobicoke, ON

said by hm :

Howard Knopf (copyright lawyer) wrote up on the position you are taking. I dropped this URL to him about NGN putting this on hold in his comment area. Refer to the comments in his Distributel blog post:
»excesscopyright.blogspot.ca/2013···isp.html

I'm not 100% sure I follow, but I think he stated you should press ahead. Anyhow he (we) have no way of knowing if you really are who you claim to be. So I'll let you contact him, or not, to set the record straight since the docket isn't updated with this latest info.

Lot's of people support your position.

Yes, I just read your post as well as HK's. As for who I am, I could not fit Daniel Puckett in as a user name, so I opted for D Puckett. I will post a reply to HK after I have had a coffee or two. I may need to discuss with our counsel first, as lawyers get cranky if/when their clients get too involved in legal discussions without their blessings


hm

@videotron.ca

said by D_Puckett:

I may need to discuss with our counsel first, as lawyers get cranky if/when their clients get too involved in legal discussions without their blessings

lol yeah that was the first thing I thought as well.

nickvca
Premium
join:2011-09-28
reply to Content

Motion-Record-of-Distributel-Communications-Limited
Download PDF
An excellent read for anyone interested

»mega.co.nz/#!OF1xzarZ!Wr134AKHB3···qsSg_fHA


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to Content

I find it interesting that CIPPIC's "first and best known victory to date" was the one he personally headed. That now in another case almost exactly the same as the BMG case, it's suddenly no longer CIPPIC's job to intervene. It seems to me that he has no confidence in CIPPIC now that he's no longer a part of it.

He's also the one who was saying that all ISPs had to do was claim PIPEDA, and it'd keep subscriber info out of the trolls' hands. I'd like to make a point that many bloggers bashed his opinion on this. As well, one blogger who agreed originally with Mr. Knopf, changed his mind after hearing additional information.

I find it funny that in his prior blogs he says the best information came not from the blog-o-sphere, but from a National Post article. With multiple people live-tweeting the court hearing, as well as others blogging from their notes from being in the court room themselves, I would have figured that the live tweets would have been some of the best information, as it was coming out as it was happening.

Personally, I have no interest in hearing anything Mr. Knopf says, as it looks self-serving, and a "I know better" attitude. Everyone has differences in opinion, but he doesn't have to write his blogs so it clearly shows he thinks his opinion is worth more than other IP lawyers'.

Distributel's submission was a work of art, and frankly is awesome.

Would Distributel/Acanac be interested in the case file of the German trial that found Guardaley's evidence to be faulty? Keep in mind that Guardaley is the program that Canipre uses for monitoring the swarms.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


MFido

join:2012-10-19
kudos:2

1 edit

said by resa1983:

Personally, I have no interest in hearing anything Mr. Knopf says, as it looks self-serving, and a "I know better" attitude.

Like almost always I total agree with you. He is too much full of shit ... I never believe or have confidence in this type of people ...


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

I find it funny that in his prior blogs he says the best information came not from the blog-o-sphere, but from a National Post article.

From what I have seen, read, and noticed is that on *his* blog he only references from people who have a certain rapport (lack of a better word). He only very very rarely allows comments unless it's from someone with a "name (lack of a better word), and rarest of all, allows an anon comment.

Out of the twitters and tweeters and those who wrote up on it, only one had something recognizable, A law degree, that he accepted. That was the reporter.

He strives to put only the most reliable of links, or the most reliable of names for his followers on *his* blog.

He also ha a very huge name in copyright. Maybe one of the biggest practicing names in Canada.

He avoids unsubstantiated claims or hearsay. My post there was indeed a very rare exception. I was kind of surprised it showed. But he laid it on the line for his readers (who may be supreme court judges, and his peers sittting on the copyright board, who knows. Only he knows) that as far as anyone should be concerned I was a nobody and the person who posted here could be a nobody and not who they claim to be.

That is *his* law blog. And that is how he runs *his* law blog.

You shouldn't be offended it by it (cuz it shows you were at the time, and still are. As were others).

Yup, in a case like this he will take the word of a lawyer with a name over the tweets of a ... well here we go again, for lack of a better word, someone with no name, credibility, and who is what exactly?

Maybe that is why his blog is one of the top law blogs in Canada as well? He only filters in the best even if it may mean leaving some other things out due to maybe unsubstantiated hearsay and claims.

Yeah, I can see many people taking offense to it. But it's his name, career, peers, and belief. No one else's.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

Personally, I have no interest in hearing anything Mr. Knopf says, as it looks self-serving, and a "I know better" attitude. Everyone has differences in opinion, but he doesn't have to write his blogs so it clearly shows he thinks his opinion is worth more than other IP lawyers'.

Distributel's submission was a work of art, and frankly is awesome.

HK more or less stated the same thing. Did you see something else?

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to hm

said by hm :

Yup, in a case like this he will take the word of a lawyer with a name over the tweets of a ... well here we go again, for lack of a better word, someone with no name, credibility, and who is what exactly?

I was unaware she was also a lawyer. That's cool. I didn't get a chance to talk to her in the courtroom or afterwards.

However, while I am obviously a nobody, I wouldn't exactly consider someone on both the CIRA & ARIN board as a nobody.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

fazeTO

join:2011-03-22
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to nickvca

This is a great read. In theory couldn't Teksavvy just use the exact same arguments? The time difference, Location issues, IP != a Person, No proof the entire file was downloaded or if the IP even had the file at all.

These are solid arguments IMO.

So a question for fellow DSLr's out there. If for some reason the judges allows this to go through in either case, what is stoping say myself from making a spreadsheet of random IP's from a TPIA and going to them and demanding names and personal information. This IP downloaded one of my songs or movies etc?? I don't see the difference.

Honestly this is all to scary. All these guys have essentially provided is a list of IPs with a date and time stamp. I just feel there needs to be a WAY higher threshold of proof before even considering something like this in court.



hm

@videotron.ca

said by fazeTO:

Honestly this is all to scary. All these guys have essentially provided is a list of IPs with a date and time stamp. I just feel there needs to be a WAY higher threshold of proof before even considering something like this in court.

And the average person couldn't shell out a for a legal defense like this, or to have the bar raised.


rednekcowboy

join:2012-03-21
Reviews:
·Acanac
·ELECTRONICBOX
reply to fazeTO

said by fazeTO:

This is a great read. In theory couldn't Teksavvy just use the exact same arguments? The time difference, Location issues, IP != a Person, No proof the entire file was downloaded or if the IP even had the file at all.

These are solid arguments IMO.

So a question for fellow DSLr's out there. If for some reason the judges allows this to go through in either case, what is stoping say myself from making a spreadsheet of random IP's from a TPIA and going to them and demanding names and personal information. This IP downloaded one of my songs or movies etc?? I don't see the difference.

Honestly this is all to scary. All these guys have essentially provided is a list of IPs with a date and time stamp. I just feel there needs to be a WAY higher threshold of proof before even considering something like this in court.

This would actually be a good test. Make up some BS song, get a buddy to upload it somewhere and get everyone you and he knows to download it. Gather all the Ip's and then go and demand the info and see if you get it.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

Resa, do your friends at fight-copyright-trolls (or something) have any info on the NGN court filings in Boston and Florida?

ref: bottom of the first post in this topic.


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

I'll check the site later, and if theres nothing, I'll email sophisticated jane doe to ask.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


fazeTO

join:2011-03-22
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to hm

Totally agree with the hm and cowboy here. I'm actually suprised the judge allowed the disclosure of information in the first Distributel request for names. Assuming they provided the same information as now (list of IP's and Date/Time). I guess I don't know exactly what traspired. Does anyone know if the judge asked any specific questions with regards to the evidence?.

Atleast in the TSI case the judge was asking some good questions and even stated a one sided affair is probably not in the public interest.


AsherN
Premium
join:2010-08-23
Thornhill, ON
reply to IamGimli

said by IamGimli:

You are correct but relevant, related Canadian cases regarding red light cameras proves that an arms-length relationship is enough for Canadian courts to assess the balance of responsibility against the defendant.

If proof of ownership of the car is enough to issue a ticket to it's owner because he's responsible for that car, with no evidence of the owner having committed the offense, proof of ownership of an ISP's service would be enough to prove responsibility for acts committed using that account.

Not all that different from the ISP/copyright scenario. A ticket is issued to the owner of the car, but that owner's driving record is unaffected because it can't be proven that he was in control of the vehicle. Similarely, an ISP can hold you, the account holder, responsible for nadwidth usage, but can't prove who actually used the bandwidth.


rednekcowboy

join:2012-03-21
Reviews:
·Acanac
·ELECTRONICBOX

said by AsherN:

said by IamGimli:

You are correct but relevant, related Canadian cases regarding red light cameras proves that an arms-length relationship is enough for Canadian courts to assess the balance of responsibility against the defendant.

If proof of ownership of the car is enough to issue a ticket to it's owner because he's responsible for that car, with no evidence of the owner having committed the offense, proof of ownership of an ISP's service would be enough to prove responsibility for acts committed using that account.

Not all that different from the ISP/copyright scenario. A ticket is issued to the owner of the car, but that owner's driving record is unaffected because it can't be proven that he was in control of the vehicle. Similarely, an ISP can hold you, the account holder, responsible for nadwidth usage, but can't prove who actually used the bandwidth.

At this point and time it's highly questionable if they can even prove that they have the correct account holder to match the IP, let alone diving into further detail. AND before they can even get to that point, they have to prove a whole bunch of different things just to be able to sue (which is also a requirement, intent to sue).

Also, that is traffic court, not a civil case. Much, much different in the way things are handled.....

souncool3

join:2009-01-07
Mississauga, ON
reply to Content

So it seems that they are going after small or indie ISP?
If someone is with Bell or Rogers they wont be troubled?
True or wishful thinking?


DanteX

join:2010-09-09
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TELUS

1 edit
reply to Content

Iron Man 3 makes billions at the box office smashes all sorts of records the investment used to make the movie is made back many times over .

I am using this movie as an example to point out there is no loss suffered no hardship suffered if the money used to make the movie is made back and a nice profit is made. BY file sharing these works it promotes the product to people who may see it watch and go " Man i like this I am going to go and buy it" my Motto is you buy what you like after watching it. Holly is scared out of their minds because with file sharing people do not need them to distributed their works. A musician can now self promote themselves.

We are living in an age were increasingly our freedoms and liberties are being sacrificed all in the name of protecting Crooks like Hollywood who run extortion rackets that threaten people to pay a few thousand dollars or face them in court.

As a result I encourage people to learn what TOR and VPNs are. hell get yourself a nice VPS and run your own VPN server create keys distribute them to friends and family and even sell a few to make a few bucks on the side like I do. The Keys do not have to be expensive maybe like 8-10 dollars a month for peace of mind.

It is so easy Grandma can do it.

All Hollywood keeps doing is pushing File sharing back underground and pushing it as well to cloud based distributed computing services where the only way to bring it down will be to bring the entire Internet down.

They keep passing domain blocks on sites like TPB Kat.ph and you know what that has done? its made these sites surge in popularity proxies are popping up every sec to provide an alternate means to access these sites.



read on

@videotron.ca
reply to souncool3

said by souncool3:

So it seems that they are going after small or indie ISP?
If someone is with Bell or Rogers they wont be troubled?
True or wishful thinking?

Keep reading on... Bell, Rogers, Cogeco, videotron etc have all given their customer names to these vultures.


somrandomguy

@distributel.net
reply to DanteX

said by DanteX:

Iron Man 3 makes billions at the box office smashes all sorts of records the investment used to make the movie is made back many times over .

And for every blockbuster there are dozens of movies that lose millions of dollars (John Carter, Gigli, Waterworld, The invasion etc). John Carter has hundreds of seeds and downloads currently and it's and "older" BT release.

Don't rationalize, just admit you didn't want to spend the money, be honest. I can respect that a lot more.

DanteX

join:2010-09-09
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TELUS

Considering a good number of the DVDS and blurays sitting on my shelves in my Office have been downloaded before I bought them I will be honest with you and admit When i download something and I like it I buy it.

If you made a product wouldn't you rather you be paid based on the fact the user found your product entertaining or useful instead of having the user buy your product only to discover its crap and of no use to them.

My buddies wife is an author who is pretty popular right now and she loves it people are downloading her works and doesn't expect to be paid.


jibby

join:2008-03-31
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to somrandomguy

said by somrandomguy :

And for every blockbuster there are dozens of movies that lose millions of dollars (John Carter, Gigli, Waterworld, The invasion etc). John Carter has hundreds of seeds and downloads currently and it's and "older" BT release.

Don't rationalize, just admit you didn't want to spend the money, be honest. I can respect that a lot more.

to be fair, Waterworlds failure was mostly due to insanely high production costs which the studio approved, and partially due to the set sinking in a hurricane

its not downloaders fault that movie was a giant flop

IamGimli

join:2004-02-28
Canada
kudos:1

said by jibby:

said by somrandomguy :

And for every blockbuster there are dozens of movies that lose millions of dollars (John Carter, Gigli, Waterworld, The invasion etc). John Carter has hundreds of seeds and downloads currently and it's and "older" BT release.

Don't rationalize, just admit you didn't want to spend the money, be honest. I can respect that a lot more.

to be fair, Waterworlds failure was mostly due to insanely high production costs which the studio approved, and partially due to the set sinking in a hurricane

its not downloaders fault that movie was a giant flop

It's never downloaders fault when movies are a flop.