| reply to TSI Marc
Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday. silentEuphor: how much will it cost someone in civil court to defend their innocence against the Troll? Who will repay that to the innocent person???
THINK MAN. |
|
| reply to resa1983
TS' financial issues are irrelevant: the issue is protecting customer privacy when invalid requests like this Troll's come. TS should have told the Troll to fook off until you have real evidence. |
|
 TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:14 | said by HammerofGawd:TS' financial issues are irrelevant: the issue is protecting customer privacy when invalid requests like this Troll's come. TS should have told the Troll to fook off until you have real evidence.
"the issue is protecting customer privacy when invalid requests like this Troll's come."
Right so. your argument to a judge would be: It doesn't matter what evidence they have, Trolling is wrong.
"TS should have told the Troll to fook off until you have real evidence." - this part has nothing to do with it according to you.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy |
|
|
|
2 edits | reply to TSI Marc
My argument would have been that Voltage's number of 2300 are inplausible and its cohort that provided them is not reputable and may not even be licensed etc and I would have demanded full diosclosure...that's not my job though, that's YOUR's.
The bottom line is IMHO TS is NOT doing all it can legally to protect its customers' privacy. IMHO that is actionable by your customers against TS on that alone.
I do not use TS, but I tell you what: if you had given out (or give out) my private info without this due diligence to a known Troll, I am gonna sue TS.
This is SERIOUS business. |
|
 EUSKill cancerPremium
join:2002-09-10
canada
 ·voip.ms
| reply to TSI Marc
Well, Teksavvy has made it to techdirt:
»www.techdirt.com/articles/201212···ll.shtml
--
~ Project Hope ~ |
|
TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:14 | reply to HammerofGawd
said by HammerofGawd:My argument would have been that Voltage's number of 2300 are inplausible and its cohort that provided them is not reputable and may not even be licensed etc and I would have demanded full diosclosure...that's not my job though, that's YOUR's.
The bottom line is IMHO TS is NOT doing all it can legally to protect its customers' privacy. IMHO that is actionable by your customers against TS on that alone.
I d not use TS, but I tell you what: if you had given out (or give out) my private info without this due diligence again a known Troll, I am gonna sue TS.
ok so, then you're saying that trolling is ok if they have the right evidence?
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy |
|
| Of course not: the issue is how TS is responding to the Troll. |
|
TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:14 | said by HammerofGawd:Of course not: the issue is how TS is responding to the Troll.
so which is it, make up your mind.
there's a big difference.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy |
|
TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:14 | reply to HammerofGawd
Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday. said by HammerofGawd:Of course not: the issue is how TS is responding to the Troll.
I can't say they're a troll if a troll is only a troll depending on their evidence.
but if I say, "they're a troll".. then it doesn't matter what they're evidence is.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy |
|
| reply to TSI Marc
I am neither a lawyer nor a judge nor a court: you cant corner me on legal arguments. :-P
I am speaking in generics. And my points remain valid.
The details are your affair.
 |
|
TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:14 | said by HammerofGawd:I am neither a lawyer nor a judge nor a court: you cant corner me on legal arguments. :-P
I am speaking in generics. And my points remain valid.
The details are your affair.
yes. well. thanks for that.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy |
|
| reply to TSI Marc
I will also say this though:
if the other ISPs in Canada have any stones they will quickly pony up major $$$ to help TS out in court.
This trolling GARBAGE has to stop here and now. |
|
TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:14 | said by HammerofGawd:I will also say this though:
if the other ISPs in Canada have any stones they will quickly pony up major $$$ to help TS out in court.
This trolling GARBAGE has to stop here and now.
This thing is already well financed. Its the arguments. The ones that lawyers and judges and courts use.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy |
|
| Then I urge you to fight the fight good fight, Sir, the Troll is on the wrong side of history and morally wrong to abuse copyright laws for extortion. Savour the moment...and protect the privacy of your customers. |
|
TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:14 | said by HammerofGawd:Then I urge you to fight the fight good fight, Sir, the Troll is on the wrong side of history and morally wrong to abuse copyright laws for extortion. Savour the moment...and protect the privacy of your customers.
I hear you dude.
The problem is that *at this stage*, we are at the pre-copyright laws stage. i.e. all they need *at this stage* is to pass the test for obtaining production of contact information. The test for proving copyright infringement is not at all in question as this point.
I'll explain more soon. Trying to get together many of the posts and address everything so it can make more sense to everybody.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy |
|
| reply to HammerofGawd
said by HammerofGawd:and protect the privacy of your customers.
Which so far they have done so far, I'm sure it would have been easy enough for them to just hand it all over to the trolls and wash their hands of it.
It would be nice if they did try and take them head on but I can't see what obligation they have to do so beyond the law. It seems that CIPPIC is prepared to do just that and they're in a better position to do so.
But agreed all trolls must die. |
|
| A few questions:
1) Can someone 'splain to me if ANY of the titles Voltage is claiming were infringed were in fact "in theatrical release" (ie. widespread showings in movie theatres) at the time of the alleged infringement?
My sources in the movie biz say that at about 4 weeks into theatrical release the producer/distributor nets about $5 per seat sold - and that amount declines from there.
2) Can anyone identify what the net proceeds of the sale of a DVD is to the copyright holder of movies/shows which are not blockbusters? Or what the net to the distributor/copyright holder is per view on Netflix? I'm guessing $1 max. and probably a lot less than that.
In other words, actual damages if non-commercial infringement is proved is in the order of $0.25-$5.00.
Maybe somebody should take up a collection at Yonge/Dundas to pay the troll off - say $250 should settle all claims in perpetutity. |
|
m3chen
join:2009-12-03
Toronto, ON | reply to TSI Marc
@TSI Marc:
Can you comment your TS's obligations to PIPEDA and customers who say they do not consent to TS giving away their data? |
|
ep80
join:2008-08-11
Montreal, QC | reply to TSI Marc
This need to stay beyond the piracy aspect of the Voltage situation.
The main thing here is: Customer privacy.
I understand that TSI will release information upon a court order, but if no opposition is shown, nothing will make the judge stop and think twice about it.
there is a difference between asking 1 or 2 IP when you have clear evidence that something is wrong, but on 2300 IPs?
The personal information from ISP's customers should never land in copyright trolls hands so early in a process. I might be naive and don't understand the court processing in civil cases, but still, if the plaintiff have good evidence, then the court should summon every designated customers and that's it. If forced to go in court against each individuals, Voltage and such would think twice before going after so many people.
What bugs me is the number of people they are trying to put in trouble to get X amount of money instead of going after the few persons that releases the movies in the first place. |
|
