Why is Tek still keeping logs??? - TekSavvy | DSLReports Forums (Page 6)

Author	All Replies
The Mongoose join:2010-01-05 Toronto, ON Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable ·Rogers Hi-Speed	reply to qweloo Re: Why is Tek still keeping logs??? said by qweloo: said by The Mongoose: We might get lucky and see TSI reduce the logging window, but given that they were planning to go to 180 days instead of 90 before this all started, I wouldn't count on it. If they had any sense they would reconsider the 180 days plan in view of the new legal context and reduce it to the strict legal minimum ... It actually would be a strong selling point to make. Well as it turns out, they reconsidered the 180 days in view of the new legal context and are staying at 90 for now. Teksavvy has lots of sense, and there's really no need for the insults that get lobbed at them.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 01:06:26 ·
Grappler join:2002-09-01 Ottawa, ON	reply to globus9991 said by globus9991: No, no. Let's call a spade a spade. At this point Tek does not give a rat's a** about customers. Sure, they did not have to e-mail affected people (that was kind of nice but meaningless), but at the same time, they caused the problem to begin with. I don't see any remorse or willingness to fix the issue. Do you? For starters Tek did not cause the problem. Those persons illegally downloading/uploading caused the problem.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 05:19:15 ·
mlord join:2006-11-05 Nepean, ON kudos:10 Reviews: ·Start Communicat.. ·TekSavvy Cable ·TekSavvy DSL	reply to TSI Gabe said by TSI Gabe: We need logs for many other reasons. Spammers, abuse, troubleshooting. Usage. I don't see how logging DHCP IP addresses helps with spam or abuse, and my experiences with TSI tech support have never included any look at past history beyond a couple of days, even when further back might have helped. I don't see any case here for keeping logs of my connection beyond a few days, or perhaps a billing period at the most, other than in exceptional circumstances. So please stop it.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 09:13:56 ·
UK_Dave join:2011-01-27 Powassan, ON kudos:2 Reviews: ·TekSavvy DSL ·Bell Sympatico	reply to Samgee Lots of folks talking around the subject here.... i.e why ISP's might or might not. When you say "They are not required to keep logs for copyright alone" - it implies you know, or think, that there ACTUALLY IS a legal requirement for ISP's to keep logs. Am I right? If so, what is your source, and what do you believe that legal retention time to be?
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 11:01:09 ·

TSI Marc Premium,VIP join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON kudos:16	Gang, I'll be posting a blog later today about exactly this. -- Marc - CEO/TekSavvy
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 11:02:08 ·
UK_Dave join:2011-01-27 Powassan, ON kudos:2 Reviews: ·TekSavvy DSL ·Bell Sympatico	Marc, hope you're doing OK. I for one would be really interested in the following: 1. What is the starting point for all ISP's? i.e What is the legal minimum time for which logs must be kept. 2. What is the TSI retention policy? i.e Is it at or above the legal minimum? 3. What is the reason for the discrepency between 1 and 2 (if one exists)? Assuming there is a law for it, Question 1 is a generic answer. Question 2 should, I believe, be an answer customers would like to know. Question 3, is none of my business, but you might wish to explain some further info if there is indeed a discrepency between 1 and 2. Cheers, Dave p.s I'm looking into answers to Q1 through a number of sources right now.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 11:07:11 ·
TSI Marc Premium,VIP join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON kudos:16	said by UK_Dave: Marc, hope you're doing OK. I for one would be really interested in the following: 1. What is the starting point for all ISP's? i.e What is the legal minimum time for which logs must be kept. 2. What is the TSI retention policy? i.e Is it at or above the legal minimum? 3. What is the reason for the discrepency between 1 and 2 (if one exists)? Assuming there is a law for it, Question 1 is a generic answer. Question 2 should, I believe, be an answer customers would like to know. Question 3, is none of my business, but you might wish to explain some further info if there is indeed a discrepency between 1 and 2. Cheers, Dave p.s I'm looking into answers to Q1 through a number of sources right now. Tx Dave. doing ok. yep. I've been trying to get to the bottom of those same answers too.. 2. is already answered.. we currently store logs for 90 days... -- Marc - CEO/TekSavvy
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 11:12:41 ·
UK_Dave join:2011-01-27 Powassan, ON kudos:2 Reviews: ·TekSavvy DSL ·Bell Sympatico 2 edits	Glad to hear it, Marc. This must be a stressful time, and I'm sure most of us on here appreciate having such an accessible CEO. To let you know, and to avoid setting multiple rabbits running, I have questions lodged with: 1. The CRTC (awaiting call back with a quotable qource). 2. The CAIP (A great chat, with an opinion attached, but I'm awaiting permission to quote following further legal clarification.) 3. A friendly provincial Member of Parliament who has connections with folks at Trade and Commerce. I have also asked them to point me somewhere to answer the question of IP ADDRESS does not equal a PERSON. 4. A personal contact within a legal practice. EDIT 5: The Candian Office of The Privacy Commisioner. (Declared that they have no legislation on the issue of Data Retention, other to offer advice and advocacy). EDIT 6: Industry Canada. (Awaiting a call back 24-48 hours to see if they believe they have a say in the matter presently, and if so, what it is). Illegitimi non carborundum! Cheers Dave
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 11:55:55 ·
RMerlin join:2009-10-09 Montreal, QC Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable	reply to globus9991 Personally I'm looking at it from both sides. If someone were to accuse me of some misdeed, I would be happy to be able to get Teksavvy to provide logs proving that I did NOT have the IP the accuser claims at the time of the misdeed. The way I see it, it goes both ways.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 12:05:37 ·
UK_Dave join:2011-01-27 Powassan, ON kudos:2 Reviews: ·TekSavvy DSL ·Bell Sympatico 1 edit	Thanks for the comment, but I'd rather keep this to facts, quotable sources, and legislation. We are all going to have differing opinions on what we might like the policy to be, but I want to know what the legal situation is at the current time. Cheers, Dave EDIT Sorry Merlin. I see you were not replying to my quote. My apologies.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 12:12:17 ·
UK_Dave join:2011-01-27 Powassan, ON kudos:2	EDIT 6: Industry Canada. (Awaiting a call back 24-48 hours to see if they believe they have a say in the matter presently, and if so, what it is).
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 12:43:59 ·
resa1983 Premium join:2008-03-10 North York, ON kudos:7	In the US, several federal judges have ruled that an IP address is not a person, and have thrown out copytroll suits. -- Battle.net Tech Support MVP
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 12:48:36 ·
UK_Dave join:2011-01-27 Powassan, ON kudos:2	Indeed. That hasn't happened here in Canada yet though.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 12:49:16 ·
Anony @terago.net	reply to resa1983 said by resa1983: In the US, several federal judges have ruled that an IP address is not a person, and have thrown out copytroll suits. And as such we need to push this to happen in Canada.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 16:50:21 ·
eeeaddict join:2010-02-14	reply to RMerlin to be fair wouldn't the burden of proof be on them to show YOU committed the deed beyond reasonable doubt? (if there are no logs then it would be EXTREMELY hard for them to prove (im not a lawyer just my 2 cents)
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 23:47:31 ·
The Mongoose join:2010-01-05 Toronto, ON Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable ·Rogers Hi-Speed	said by eeeaddict: to be fair wouldn't the burden of proof be on them to show YOU committed the deed beyond reasonable doubt? (if there are no logs then it would be EXTREMELY hard for them to prove (im not a lawyer just my 2 cents) Not in a lawsuit. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence in criminal trials, but in a civil suit it's simply balance of probabilities. If a judge thinks it's more likely that you committed the deed than not, you lose. It's why OJ Simpson could be found not guilty of murder but lost the civil case where he was found responsible for the deaths of the people he killed. Same principle, a lot less dramatic.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 23:53:56 ·
The Mongoose join:2010-01-05 Toronto, ON Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable ·Rogers Hi-Speed	reply to UK_Dave said by UK_Dave: Glad to hear it, Marc. This must be a stressful time, and I'm sure most of us on here appreciate having such an accessible CEO. To let you know, and to avoid setting multiple rabbits running, I have questions lodged with: 1. The CRTC (awaiting call back with a quotable qource). 2. The CAIP (A great chat, with an opinion attached, but I'm awaiting permission to quote following further legal clarification.) 3. A friendly provincial Member of Parliament who has connections with folks at Trade and Commerce. I have also asked them to point me somewhere to answer the question of IP ADDRESS does not equal a PERSON. 4. A personal contact within a legal practice. EDIT 5: The Candian Office of The Privacy Commisioner. (Declared that they have no legislation on the issue of Data Retention, other to offer advice and advocacy). EDIT 6: Industry Canada. (Awaiting a call back 24-48 hours to see if they believe they have a say in the matter presently, and if so, what it is). Illegitimi non carborundum! Cheers Dave I'm on a similar quest, Dave. I think I need to read everything Michael Geist has written on the subject and then send him a couple of follow-up questions. He really is the Canadian expert on such matters.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-12 23:55:32 ·
alphaz18 join:2005-02-26 CANADA	reply to globus9991 Heres a suggestion: (may or may not be of any use) what if you kept logs of the mac addresses and time instead of IPs.. would that not throw wrenches into the copyright trolls methods?
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-13 02:53:39 ·
Anonymous225 @swissinet.com	My personal suggestion here would be to pay for the content, or do without. I remember coming here years ago and seeing someone suggest that the people who used torrents and were complaining about throttling on Bell's end were torrenting for reasons that were less than legal. It was vehemently denied. It seems that individual has been vindicated by what I see here.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-12-13 06:10:17 ·

O Canada! > Canadian > TekSavvy > Why is Tek still keeping logs???

Re: Why is Tek still keeping logs???