dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
74641
share rss forum feed

hades_2100

join:2002-09-14
Burnaby, BC
reply to TSI Marc

Re: Blog - Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

To confirm, this isn't the "Recent Developments in Canadian Copyright Law" email that was sent out on the 3rd. This is a new email sent out this morning, correct?

Have all the emails been sent out yet?

I'm interested in this as I have a few friends/relatives on TekSavvy (including me). Hopefully this won't impact us, I doubt it, but playing it safe.

Thanks.

hades


JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to jibby

quote:
(reply to TSI Marc)
in the states they ruled that an IP address does not equal a person - is it the same in Canada?

i'd like to see a court prove that it was ME behind any IP
Ontario Court of Appeals just ruled that an IP does not equal a person so requesting individual's information based on an IP is highly questionable.

markf

join:2008-01-24
Burlington, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·ELECTRONICBOX
·Execulink Telecom
reply to TSI Marc

I am a landlord with university students in a house.

They have Teksavvy service and I am quite sure that they download less than legal material. The account is under my name.

I have not received a notice, but does anyone know what happens in those situations?

Who will take the heat should their IP come up? It is clear as day that I rarely am in that house (maybe an hour or so a month taking care of small things).

Any other landlords or anyone know how this will be approached under this law?



XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada
reply to vientito1

said by vientito1:

$10000 ... are they out of their minds?

Probably costs less to build a guillotin

Was it not changed to a max of 5000$ ?


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2
reply to TSI Marc

I just checked the list of titles, and I've never heard of a single one of them. This almost sounds like a cash grab for third-rate titles.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



rodjames
Premium
join:2010-06-19
Gloucester, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·loclhost.ca
reply to TSI Marc

I hope you're showing up to that court date, and getting a good legal team to ask exactly why Voltage is blanketing your service, and for what reason.

I would also inquire as to what methods they have implemented to determine their information gathered, as well as full disclosure as to exactly who, where and how (packet data) downloaded their information.

Also, same for me Francois, I never heard of any of their movies before.



enzymes

join:2003-11-29
Brampton, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to TSI Marc

Just seems like a scare tactic towards Teksavvy to hand over names

I didn't receive any emails but then again, I don't download trash movies. And I highly doubt 2300 were downloading/uploading those shitty movies from Teksavvy IPs. Looks like a bunch of bullshit in order to get money from us for their failure in producing quality films/ distributing films at fair prices.



rodjames
Premium
join:2010-06-19
Gloucester, ON
reply to TSI Marc

OH FRIG ME

The Hurt Locker comes to Canada yall!

I'm gonna download it right now, then when I go to court, I'm gonna ask for my money back, cause it's shit.

THEN I'm gonna quote this thread as free speech in downloading it.


sMURF

join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
reply to taraf

said by taraf:

Well, I'll be amused if they request my details on this one... I was in hospital for a major operation at that time, and can prove it.

As if that would stop them... »www.techdirt.com/articles/201108···ed.shtml


kragop

join:2006-02-15
Scarborough, ON
reply to TSI Marc

Do streaming movies count as downloading?



bbbc

join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica
kudos:2
reply to TSI Marc

Man Marc, does it ever get boring running an ISP? Seems like you guys don't get a break from the battles. I sincerely hope you can keep your health.

--
Consumerist.com | Consumers Union


rytar

join:2002-01-29
Oshawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to TSI Marc

If i am reading all this right, If someone got one of these emails they should be seeking a lawyer ASAP??? & not just wait until the 17th when Voltage & TSI goto court???
Should one wait until the ruling when voltage has users names etc or the court contacts said person?
Im kinda getting the feeling that voltage will be getting every ones names etc but from there UNKNOWN.
I know TSI states seek a lawyer basically, but is this $$ needed to be spent on one right now?


kabes

join:2010-05-14
Kitchener, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to TSI Marc

Thanks for the transparency. You wouldn't see Bhell or Robbers doing this.

Secondly I hope everyone who downloads stuff like this starts using a VPN now. »torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-provi···-111007/

If anyone got an email I wouldn't panic. Isn't there supposed to be a $5000 max? Not sure if its economical for them to take people to court over such a small amount. They will most definitely try to scare you into settling though.



TSI Marc
Premium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:26
reply to bbbc

said by bbbc:

Man Marc, does it ever get boring running an ISP? Seems like you guys don't get a break from the battles. I sincerely hope you can keep your health.

Its never booring that's for sure.

I generally dont mind taking this stuff on but I really do need a break. It's been one hell of a year.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy


corster
Premium
join:2002-02-23
Gatineau, QC
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

said by JMJimmy:

said by TSI Marc:

i.e. it's not the downloading part they're saying.. it's the making it available to others.

"Making available"

quote:
Canada's Federal Court recently ruled that placing a copy of a downloaded song on a shared directory in a computer where that copy can be accessed via a peer-to-peer file sharing program does not amount to distribution of that copy so as to constitute infringement of copyright under Canada's Copyright Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42. (BMG Canada Inc. et al. v. John Doe, 2004 FC 488
(March 31, 2004, von Finckenstein, J.; appeal filed on April 13, 2004)).
Muzak, supra still applies.
quote:
a person does not authorize infringement by authorizing the mere use of equipment that could be used to infringe copyright. Courts should presume that a person who authorizes an activity does so only so far as it is in accordance with the law
Marc: Even if a court order is issued, I really hope TekSavvy will not release the information until any/all appeals processes have been exhausted. Give people a chance to fight back (going to be hard to do with 7 days notice around Christmas)

That ruling was under the old copyright laws...

I'm no lawyer, but as these alleged infringements occurred prior to the new copyright laws coming into effect, the new laws will likely not apply in this case.

Likewise, court precedent will still apply, unless the new copyright act specifically changes the definition of distribution.


yesss

@videotron.ca
reply to markf

said by markf:

I am a landlord with university students in a house.

They have Teksavvy service and I am quite sure that they download less than legal material. The account is under my name.

I have not received a notice, but does anyone know what happens in those situations?

Who will take the heat should their IP come up? It is clear as day that I rarely am in that house (maybe an hour or so a month taking care of small things).

Any other landlords or anyone know how this will be approached under this law?

Yup.
my bro-in-law got one of these, but this was prior to this new law. So he just got a notice about infringement. He and his family are 100% non-english-speaking French with no apple products. They got the notice for downloading an English movie converted for some apple ipod thing. Was one of their renters (there was only one english family renting from him and they had an ipod thingy). But it came in his name nonetheless like it will for you since you are listed in their accounting system as the account receivable.

Then good luck suing the tenant.

In my bro-in-laws case it was a single mother on welfare and he figured he was doing her a favour by giving her free internet since she stated she couldn't afford it for her kids. If ever push came to shove she would have free legal aid most likely and he would be out a few grand either fighting it or going after the single mom on welfare.

So you may want to revisit the situation of providing net for your tenants. He cut them after that.

So he was lucky enough to have gotten the notice as a warning prior to this new law which allows them to go after you. You aren't so lucky, so take the advice and cut your tenants. Make them pay their own in their own name to save you a headache and possible thousands.

Not worth being Mr Nice Guy in this situation.

Take it or leave it.


TSI Marc
Premium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:26
reply to TSI Marc

I know that the notification we sent has a lot of you very concerned, and many are wondering what they can or should do.

We have tried to provide some general information on copyright law, and links to other resources that you may find helpful. Unfortunately, as your ISP, it's difficult for us to answer many of the questions that the notification has provoked.

TekSavvy does not monitor our customers' use of the Internet and has no involvement in collecting the IPs presented in this request by Voltage, so we are also not in a position to speculate on the validity of the claims, nor contest the request for information.

We are also not lawyers, not experts in copyright law or legal procedure -- and frankly not in a position to advise anyone with respect to the application of the law to their particular situation, or the actions that they should take in response to the motion for disclosure or the defense of potential claims that may be made against them.

If you have particular questions about the application of copyright law to you, or how you might respond to Voltage's motion for disclosure of customer identities, we urge you to seek independent legal advice. In addition, should you at any time receive a legal demand letter alleging infringement or face a copyright infringement lawsuit, you may also want to seek independent legal advice.

The Law Society of Upper Canada provides a free lawyer referral service, which will provide you with the name of a lawyer or licensed paralegal who will provide a free consultation of up to 30 minutes to help you determine your rights and options.

Here are links that may be useful:

Law Society's lawyer referral service: »www.lsuc.on.ca/faq.aspx?id=2147486372

TekSavvy Copyright Law in Canada Notice: »www.teksavvy.com/en/why-teksavvy···n-canada
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy



bbbc

join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica
kudos:2
Reviews:
·FreedomPop
reply to TSI Marc

Marc, were these notices limited to one coast, TSI East as opposed to TSI West, or did every province you have a presence in (including Atlantic provinces) have an email sent to one of your clients?

--
Consumerist.com | Consumers Union


Guru

join:2008-10-01
kudos:2

Just a thought, I could be wrong BUT

It would have been better if Teksavvy kept logs so Teksavvy can actually verify to see if it's valid or not, etc...


dskum

join:2009-12-05
Iselin, NJ

Was it a blind list of TSI range of IP address? I rarely see any movies and dont speak English natively. When I received the email I didnt even know it was a movie and after some googling I realized based on info on IMDB. (Initially for a moment thought it was a bulkmail and almost deleted it)

For sure I didnt download, but still unsure on what basis the list was selected. or if the router or any password was compromised.


hades_2100

join:2002-09-14
Burnaby, BC
reply to Guru

said by Guru:

Just a thought, I could be wrong BUT

It would have been better if Teksavvy kept logs so Teksavvy can actually verify to see if it's valid or not, etc...

If they kept logs then we would be complaining about them keeping logs.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to corster

said by corster:

I'm no lawyer, but as these alleged infringements occurred prior to the new copyright laws coming into effect, the new laws will likely not apply in this case.

Likewise, court precedent will still apply, unless the new copyright act specifically changes the definition of distribution.

The laws could apply if they use an end-around with the 1996 WIPO treaties. They have 3 years from the date of infringement under the new laws but it's unclear if that applies to alleged infringements prior to the 7th of November 2012.

The reason I posted those specific portions of the ruling is that that is a core part of the copyright act which was not modified. Authorization is the key determinant in judging wilful copyright infringement. The act of downloading a file via P2P is not illegal in Canada. Nor is using equipment (P2P) which may cause you to infringe as you are not in control of said equipment nor the actions of others who may use it.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to dskum

said by dskum:

Was it a blind list of TSI range of IP address? I rarely see any movies and dont speak English natively. When I received the email I didnt even know it was a movie and after some googling I realized based on info on IMDB. (Initially for a moment thought it was a bulkmail and almost deleted it)

For sure I didnt download, but still unsure on what basis the list was selected. or if the router or any password was compromised.

My email used a Montreal Quebec IP address for a title which they don't own copyright to (The Third Act)

Guru

join:2008-10-01
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to hades_2100

said by hades_2100:

said by Guru:

Just a thought, I could be wrong BUT

It would have been better if Teksavvy kept logs so Teksavvy can actually verify to see if it's valid or not, etc...

If they kept logs then we would be complaining about them keeping logs.

I don't deny that as well. But in the cases like this where the said "XXX" company gave TSI list of IPs to go after and TSI did that! That quite doesn't make sense to me!


eots

join:2003-02-04
reply to TSI Marc

When the new law only came into effect on November 7 then how can Voltage make any claims under the new law for alleged violations prior to November 7? Like others have already said, it looks like a cash grab to make up for apparent shitty box office or DVD revenue on craptastic films no one has heard of.

If the courts don't throw this out then the Federal Government has just given low budget film makers a new way to make money off of films they can't sell legitimately!


funny

join:2010-12-22
reply to TSI Marc

dont care what they are asking for ( and im not one of the named ) THE MAX for non commercial infringement is 5000$
and if they did ever sue me a lil known technicality means the max they can ever get at once per month off me is 50$
so 100 months to get 5000....if say i were file sharing lol
ill admit in court if i ever got there i took one of everyhting currently available and then proceed later to make sure i was correct ....
hahaha
as hitchikers guide to the galaxy says....

so long and thanks for all the fish....

Expand your moderator at work


KPaul

join:2007-02-08
reply to TSI Marc

Re: Blog - Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

Wondering, can TSI not move their 90 days to less than that? Or is that a law? Ie, keep records only for a week, or whatever?


Guru

join:2008-10-01
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by KPaul:

Wondering, can TSI not move their 90 days to less than that? Or is that a law? Ie, keep records only for a week, or whatever?

That's what Guspaz asked as well but no answer from Marc confirming that!

funny

join:2010-12-22
reply to TSI Marc

oh and im pretty sure one cant sue people using a new law for stuff form before the time the law came into affect , make sure whom evers lawyers know this...cause the max if they use the new law is ONLY 5000 and if they cant use the new law they cant be asking marc to give the information
THAT'S something marc needs to visit with a lawyer right away.

does this action by vonage to make a claim from before said law had affect allow them to do something that prior to said law they could not do?