site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
10308
Share Topic
Posting?
Post a:
Post a:
Links: ·TekSavvy DSL Reviews ·TekSavvy Forum FAQ ·Speedtest results
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4
AuthorAll Replies

Samgee

join:2010-08-02
canada
kudos:2

1 edit

reply to TSI Marc

Re: Copyright - are you affected?

I agree, it's very hard to believe that only the Teksavvy customers uploaded data would have been enough to create even those single complete files on their own.

Hopefully those representing the defendants can help the judge to understand this discrepancy. The claim should be denied.

hmph

join:2012-10-23

reply to Samgee
This is actually completely ridiculous. This entire case is based off of Canipre's thought that if you are connected to a torrent tracker and downloading p2p content, then you are automatically sharing full copies of the content in question. This is completely false. Canipre would have no access to be able to analyze each transmitted bit-torrent packet, unless they were simultaneously recording all traffic between each p2p user on that specific torrent. A statement claiming to do this, is borderline insane, considering this is close to impossible to accomplish. This case is a complete joke. Canipre obviously doesn't know how the internet works and has no clue how to do anything other then to dish out pointless court cases and claim to use "forensic" software, that just logs IP addresses. In reality they have little to no proof if someone completely a download or distributed a completed download.

If they are able to accomplish their goals of taking money from us once(with little to no proof), what stops them from doing it over and over?

Someone needs to put them in their place.


hmph

join:2012-10-23

reply to analog andy
This is simply not possible.
Teksavvy does not log all traffic to and from their customers (this is illegal, regardless teksavvy would never do such a thing). All that is logged is the IP address and the amount of bandwidth on the customer side.
At this point there would be no way to see if it was Voltage that was sharing the content or not.



RogersLite
Cisco Geek

join:2004-12-05
Canada

reply to TSI Marc
Is there a sample screenshot that has this?
Looks like I probably don't but just wanted to make sure.



TSI Marc
Premium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:15

said by RogersLite:

Is there a sample screenshot that has this?
Looks like I probably don't but just wanted to make sure.

It would be in big red writing.. you cant miss it.. if you dont see anything like that. you dont need to worry.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy


RogersLite
Cisco Geek

join:2004-12-05
Canada

Sound good then .
Thanks Marc


iknow_t

join:2012-05-03

reply to TSI Marc

Re: Copyright - are you affected?

welcome to what the U.S. has been through. many courts in the U.S. have ruled an IP address is not a person, and have gotten sick of this abuse, and denied this type of abuse of the court system. they have also ruled that holding the account holder responsible is, and i forgot the exact wording, but it's like "far fetched at best". you can look on google for "an IP address is not a person" for more details.


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Burlington, ON

reply to kabes

said by kabes:

It looks like these are the movies Canpire was monitoring...

Okay, I admit I don't follow the latest and greatest films, but I don't think I've ever heard of any of the films listed. Are these all B roll movies?


Gimli
Premium
join:2006-01-03
l5a2o4

reply to TSI Marc
I dont have the time to read the entire claim that Marc posted, but I did scan through quickly....

I am not a lawyer, and I can see a ton of holes in their claim

Even better, Im sure that I saw them reference court cases for copyright infringement that even after obtaining IP adress information.... the plaintiff (trolls) lost... and then lost AGAIN on appeal.

what a waste of time and money.



El Anon

@teksavvy.com

reply to A Lurker

Okay, I admit I don't follow the latest and greatest films, but I don't think I've ever heard of any of the films listed. Are these all B roll movies?
I think it's adult films?

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:7
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable

said by El Anon :

Okay, I admit I don't follow the latest and greatest films, but I don't think I've ever heard of any of the films listed. Are these all B roll movies?
I think it's adult films?

The adult films are down in the US. I don't believe the Voltage pictures are anything more than just crappy movies nobody wanted to watch (they flopped), so Voltage is trying to now make money via copytrolling those crappy movies.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


Rickkins

join:2004-04-05
Mtl, Canada

reply to TSI Marc
Anybody wanna bet that the incumbents are in cahoots with these guys somehow.....


MFido

join:2012-10-19
kudos:1

reply to TSI Marc
Marc, on another discussion someone suggested that you should ask $100-$200 per IP requested by the troll as you are doing a lot of work to identify and provide them ... I think it is a good idea



roostie

@199.246.88.x

reply to resa1983
So have all notices gone out then? Or should people still be watching for them?



hind_sight

@podgorny.cz

reply to MFido
Charging $200 per IP is a very bad idea.

You might think it will be a deterrent for the the infringement accusers.

On the other hand this would be a easy profit stream for other profit hungry ISPs.

Who cares about protecting your customers, when there is more money to be made in selling them out to the highest accuser.

Obviously I am not talking about Teksavvy. Other ISPs aren't nearly as trustworthy.

So just drop the idea. In the long run, this will end up hurting ISP subscribers more.


voxframe

join:2010-08-02

reply to TSI Marc

Re: Copyright - are you affected?

Marc, is there any way to extend this to the reseller panels?

Also is there a way to check this for LAN connections? (We don't have a login for those if I'm right)


shrug

@videotron.ca

reply to hind_sight

said by hind_sight :

Who cares about protecting your customers, when there is more money to be made in selling them out to the highest accuser.

This is already done by Bell, Videotron and Cogeco (maybe Distributel & ACN as well from the looks of it). It's a practice already being performed.

So the point and concern of peoples information being for sale is already moot since it's already done. Thing is, no customers from the above companies filed the complaint with PrivCom since an entire section of the act was not observed by these ISP's. It's a claim and ruling waiting to happen and there is a dollar figure attached to that.

It's the "action" of the ISP that people need to be aware of.
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4

Tuesday, 18-Jun 20:15:01 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 13.5 years online © 1999-2013 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics