| reply to hm
Re: Voltage-Hurt Locker Lawsuit Round 2 Against Teksavvy Users I saw this link a few days ago, it was written in the UK for people that had Troll problems over there.
Very interesting document
Had a lot of denial letter templates to respond to settlement demands.
How To “Fight Copyright Trolls”
»www.dropbox.com/s/bc8nr49vq0ukf9···olls.pdf |
|
|
|
 hm
@videotron.ca | reply to Gone
Never thought of it that way. Then again, I never got a Quebec parking ticket that gave me such a reduction in cost if paid early. You only pay more when the time exceeds "X", but the base ticket cost is never decreased.
So this is an Ontario thing?
Makes me wonder if certain prov's regulate things like this. Quite possibly.
Makes me also wonder why Voltage pulled out of the QC lawsuits. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Bell Fibe
 ·ELECTRONICBOX
| reply to nickvca
said by nickvca:I saw this link a few days ago, it was written in the UK for people that had Troll problems over there.
Very interesting document
Had a lot of denial letter templates to respond to settlement demands.
How To “Fight Copyright Trolls”
»www.dropbox.com/s/bc8nr49vq0ukf9···olls.pdf
nice guide.
This should be sent to the 2300 teksavvy customers should TS give out their informatoion |
|
m3chen
join:2009-12-03
Toronto, ON Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to nickvca
@nickvca:
Very interesting document; I wonder if any thing like that could be written for a Canadian audience! Here is an tidbit from that pdf I found intriguing:
"The burden of proof remains with the claimant. They must
demonstrate that you either did, or authorised someone else to copy or share the whole or a
substantial part of the copyright work. There has never been a case in the UK where someone
has been found guilty of this type of infringement using solely IP address evidence."
Has there been a case in Canada where someone was found guilty based solely on IP evidence? |
|
| reply to random
said by random :>non commercial file share
That sounds like "I am guilty, but..." plea in court that might get you to the $100 - $5000 (cap) instead of the $10k these sneeze balls are asking for.
did you read what i said
NO ther eis no admission is stating that a platiniff has inccorrectly filed a suit go back spend money on your legal team and try again...
like i said i really dont think that they will if all they can hope for is 5 grand and yet might get a lot lot less like 100$ per person...the legal fees and court filing fees wont cover that.... |
|
| reply to Gone
said by Gone:said by rednekcowboy:I'll tell you how it will turn out, the case will get tossed cause they can't meet their burden of proof. It won't even get that far. They'll drop the case themselves after they've managed to make a handsome profit on the extortion letters that they'll send out shortly after they get the names... ... and it may not even get that far if the judge adjourned the case despite Voltage's objections. This entire request may be denied. We'll have to wait and see. CIPPIC Might actually get this quashed because it is quite clear this is not a commercial claim of copyright infringement thus its tossed out and they wont bother if all they are gonna get is 100$ a movie with a max for everything one infringes to 5000 dollars.
and as it then would be under 7 grand you can get legal aid so why not fight....you have zero to lose and everything to gain...
then there is undue hardship on welfare and disability cases where at best you cant get more then 50$ /month and its very very risky to try and game this system....
UNLESS you get everyone's names and addresses and can find out what incomes they have and threaten the more better off ones....and then in a reverse way that is like discrimination.... |
|
 GonePremium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:3 | Legal aid is rarely granted for criminal cases unless you have a significant threat of jail time. Knowing this, you can completely and totally forget about it for a civil case, regardless of your income or the amount you're being sued for. |
|
| reply to Stan
said by Stan:said by funny:you don't admit to non commercially filesharing YOU say that the ip address alone cannot prove commercial filesharing and thus giving peoples names and addresses wont make any difference. But what if I did do it? Wouldn't it be better to just throw myself on the court's mercy and hope for a $100 fine than to fight? Can't I be charged with perjury if I lie and say I did nothing and it's later proven that I actually did do it, like if they demand to see my computer? so if i sue you for wrecking my car and you didn't your reasoning is to goto court cause you think its cheaper to just plead guilty cause i said 100$ or ill sue you for ten grand? NO this is about making sure that in a civil case the proper lawsuit is at least addressed and not some one trying ot game a system because people are poor.
i'd rather get ten year sin prison then plead guilty to anything i did not do or was not guilty of. |
|
| reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:Actually, I just looked at C-11...
quote:
Infringements not involved in proceedings
(1.12) If the copyright owner has made an election under subsection (1) with respect to a defendant’s infringements that are for non-commercial purposes, they are barred from recovering statutory damages under this section from that defendant with respect to any other of the defendant’s infringements that were done for non-commercial purposes before the institution of the proceedings in which the election was made.
No other statutory damages
(1.2) If a copyright owner has made an election under subsection (1) with respect to a defendant’s infringements that are for non-commercial purposes, every other copyright owner is barred from electing to recover statutory damages under this section in respect of that defendant for any of the defendant’s infringements that were done for non-commercial purposes before the institution of the proceedings in which the election was made.
Essentially, if Voltage sues someone for non-commercial, they can't sue for statutory dmgs.. And, if there was another infringement before Voltage files, the other copytroll can't sue for it either. nice try the fact is in other sections they actually spell out what commercial and NON commercial is and you cant bascially ask for commercial damages UNLESS you prove the person was doing commercial aspects and in this the courts, and the govt will say this is non commercial i am very confident of that ....
THUS if they want to ask for NON commercial damages they must first prove it was a commercial copyright infringement....which they cant do form jsut a list of ip addresses ...no more then you can tell who and what i am atm even if you really did it would not change either fact.
in fact the govt has said that the reaosn for the very aspect of a maximum for all infringments for non commerical is the very reaosn the govt says it put that in to stop this kinda of lawsuit...ergo they don't want USA/BRITISH style mass copyright lawsuits....
also due to vagueness of the term "all infringements" one might argue that if your going down for one you might as well admit to them all ....and i mean millions of them and make sure you ask the court to read them all out taking days and days. might bring a smile ot peopels face to know its costing a troll money for lawyers each day...again make sure you run everything by legal counsel...i'm going to add this at end of every post form now on...just so people get the HINT... |
|
| reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:said by Gone:said by cog_biz_user:Would it be considered extortion if they mailed letters to the supposed filesharers asking for more than $5k? Sortof like a "pay us $15k now, or we'll see you in court" kind of thing? I wouldn't be surprised if that actually happens. That's exactly what happens. Those who ignore the letter and let it go to court usually end up better off - if not outright unscathed - than those who freak out and pay. They've gotten default judgements from people in the US who've done that.. 250k default judgements against them. If you make a fuss however, they'll file you in a named suit.. :\ Safest for all, is keeping everything anonymous - making sure Voltage doesn't get the sub info. and again this is not THE USA
please dont even start ...its nto same country and not even same laws THUS you nor i should care about what happens there in so far as our wanring of the types a trolls we could face and why this law has the terms in it NON COMMERICAL and commerical spelled out for damages...and it has a max 5 grand for non commercial...FOR ALL YOUR INFRINGMENTS. |
|
| reply to Gone
said by Gone:There's a difference between a mere letter demanding settlement and an actual statement of claim served to you by hand. One is safe to ignore, the other is not.
You are not going to have a default judgement rendered against you unless you receive a statement of claim first certified by a clerk of the court first.
which in small claims court costs like 120$ to file...higher court more cost....and then add lawyers...UNLESS your being sued and its under 7 grand then you can get legal aid. |
|
| reply to hm
said by hm :said by elitefx:...money is no object. Bring it on Voltage.........
YAH! We will crowd source legal strategy and legal filings! So umm... I only know how to put a stamp on an envelope to say, "see you in court", I'll let others fill in the blanks... THINK SCO vs LINUX and how groklaw.net worked
very very interesting idea....
you might even get PJ to pick up on this and get some people going!!!! |
|
| reply to TOPDAWG
said by TOPDAWG:did not RMCP not once say they would not go after pirates? this is not like the US where you can clog up the courts like crazy with BS and have the government spend well into the millions going after people.
What I want to know how can a US company can come into Canada and demand cdns info of any type unless it's a serious crime. Did the company demand the info themselves or hire a company in Canada to do it for them or use their cdn bunch if they got one to request the info?
the rcmp said that they would not go after non commerical file sharing....which cause there are millions of them you can see why ...interestign take is the charter of rights and freedoms says if a law is unenforceable then it should not become a law.... |
|
| reply to Gone
said by Gone:Ever looked at a parking ticket?
The ticket is $30 or whatever. Pay it within seven days and it's $10 or whatever. If you don't pay it within that seven day period, it's the $30 the ticket was originally for. They're discounting the fine for early payment, not increasing the fine for not paying it quick enough.
With these extortion letters it's the same deal and all good and legal if they word it as the settlement being $7000, but reduced to $5200 if paid within x period of time. Again, it all comes down to how they word it, and they don't need to justify anything in that regard.
Alas, this is a completely separate issue from the core of this discussion.
no its not the ticket cost is for you not fighting what you are guilty of after all in this case a cop saw your car , at a place without meter money in the machine ergo you aren't paying ot be there..
you get a nice thing by paying ahead a time and if you decide to goto court and lose you pay more cause your costing the system more money...
HERE they are claiming first off your doing something you are not and cant prove via ip addies alone , and on that false premise they will try and get your names and addesses and then tell you are guilty and need to pay up for face 10 grand....
One its easy to see how the system works and is fair the other is just a scam and dare i say it fraud...cause they having experience in courts should know better then to try this... |
|
| reply to nickvca
said by nickvca:I saw this link a few days ago, it was written in the UK for people that had Troll problems over there.
Very interesting document
Had a lot of denial letter templates to respond to settlement demands.
How To “Fight Copyright Trolls”
»www.dropbox.com/s/bc8nr49vq0ukf9···olls.pdf
let me ask you if i were a judge and suddenly i get to see a lot of these generic letters as evidence at some point ...do i feel your trying to defend yourself or being lazy? IF i were you id make it nice n personal and in your own words has more weight in my opinion in a court just look at those and see your own words ....and again run such stuff by a lawyer THIS IS CANADA NOT THE UK.... |
|
| reply to m3chen
said by m3chen:@nickvca:
Very interesting document; I wonder if any thing like that could be written for a Canadian audience! Here is an tidbit from that pdf I found intriguing:
"The burden of proof remains with the claimant. They must
demonstrate that you either did, or authorised someone else to copy or share the whole or a
substantial part of the copyright work. There has never been a case in the UK where someone
has been found guilty of this type of infringement using solely IP address evidence."
Has there been a case in Canada where someone was found guilty based solely on IP evidence?
and i'd like to see any of you tell me when my ip address is making money so that one could prove its commercial or non commercial in nature at any given time no matter what protocol i am using! |
|
| said by funny:and i'd like to see any of you tell me when my ip address is making money so that one could prove its commercial or non commercial in nature at any given time no matter what protocol i am using!
Don't you worry. If ever you got nailed they would drop anything and everything against you since it's very clear you are not responsible for your actions.
*shrug*
...and such is life. |
|
GonePremium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| reply to funny
said by funny:no its not the ticket cost is for you not fighting what you are guilty of after all in this case a cop saw your car , at a place without meter money in the machine ergo you aren't paying ot be there.. Bzzt. Take a look at the following document: »www.welland.ca/ByLaws/bylaw_sect···2000.pdf
In the above example, the parking fines are discounted if you pay within seven days. Most municipalities offer this kind of incentive. If you take the ticket to court not only do you pay the set fine forfeiting any discount, but you pay court costs which often times are more than the set fine. Furthermore, in most municipalities it isn't cops who write parking tickets, it's parking enforcement bylaw officers.
This is all good and legal and happens all the time. |
|
GonePremium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| reply to funny
said by funny:the rcmp said that they would not go after non commerical file sharing....which cause there are millions of them you can see why ...interestign take is the charter of rights and freedoms says if a law is unenforceable then it should not become a law.... The RCMP only deal with criminal copyright infringement. A rights holder is still entitled to file a civil suit if they so desire. |
|
hm
@videotron.ca | said by Gone:The RCMP only deal with criminal copyright infringement. A rights holder is still entitled to file a civil suit if they so desire.
hmm don't think so..
»www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/qc/nouv-news/···-eng.htm
The RCMP takes action and investigates this type of crime if there are grounds to believe that material has been copied for the purpose of commercial distribution, or to such an extent as to be prejudicial to the copyright holder. Every person who copies or reproduces a video game for the purpose of commercial distribution or sale commits an offence under the Copyright Act.
The RCMP could go after these people, and they have in the past 2 years for what voltage is claiming in their court filing (ie. commercial distribution). But I can't see the RCMP even touching this one, the way it is, with a 10-foot pole since we all know there is no commercial distribution here.
More like a trick for people to say they only downloaded it for themselves and not for commercial distribution.
In regards to the games that were copied above by this french guy, most none of the title were available in Quebec due to them only being available in English. So again what financial harm is there when the product is banned from a prov and people can't even buy them. heh.
Different for these Ontario people charged though...
So one must wonder, if voltage is so adamant that these people committed commercial distribution, they could have involved the RCMP. But for some reason chose not to. And we all know the reason why. |
|
