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.

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 .

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?

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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 :)

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.

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.

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.

:/
.. 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?
..

:/
It's not fair. They nail my IP as downloading some goat porn w/ clothes on, you get an action movie, and the guy above some yodeler.
:huh:

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?

Someone Email JF to get over there?

hahah says my ip dl'd Ed Sheeran - + (Plus) [2011 Album]

who the f^&^ is ed sheeran besides I stopped getting music in the 90's. I would never dl any of the crap produced today.

np.

Didn't notice the link on MG on the first read, just checking it out now.

Kind of odd how this so-called "forensics" company doesn't know about time synchronization.

...only on para 20 and you made some great points so far.

Do you plan on taking action for this.... lie.

Do you plan on taking action for this.... lie.

Daniel, I'm sort of surprised you expected your customers to receive C&D letters, considering Voltage's history down in the States..