dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
54618
share rss forum feed


pnjunction
Teksavvy Extreme
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1
reply to John234234

Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.

said by John234234 :

I must say I am horribly disappointed in Teksavvy's decision to just hand over our info like that and give in without a fight.

I will be looking for other alternative ISP if possible.

So which ISP is it again that has shown they will fight a court order like this?

cynic10

join:2011-02-05

1 recommendation

Seeing as this is the first time something of this magnitude has occured in Canada, I would expect TSI to fight it. Especially when we know the outcome of it will impact what happens next to all of ISP in Canada.

Give them an inch and they will ask for a mile, ever heard that saying?

If anything, TSI should take heed from this Australian ISP.

ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”
»torrentfreak.com/isp-walks-out-o···-121217/


pizz
1gbps is all the rage.
Premium
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

1 recommendation

reply to pnjunction
said by pnjunction:

said by John234234 :

I must say I am horribly disappointed in Teksavvy's decision to just hand over our info like that and give in without a fight.

I will be looking for other alternative ISP if possible.

So which ISP is it again that has shown they will fight a court order like this?

That is the problem. Canadian ISPs just give in. As with Verizon here in the USA, they fight these type of dunning letters / ip requests etc.. And they appeal each court order for releasing said IPs, contact info etc..

In my humble opinion. Marc, is just playing the fence on this. Waiting to see which side wins in court. If the decision goes the way of the trolls: He can state, look we complied, so don't label my company as, it's OK to be a pirate and do copyright infringement deeds.

If the law now states : Copyright Troll based companies, cannot just demand IPs, Customer Information from ISP companies. He can now say, we fought the good fought, i was always there protecting my customers. How! Because I didn't do anything.

In my many, many years on this earth. I've dealt with every type of CEO, Chairman's of the board, board members, Presidents, Owners, VPs etc.. They're trained to play both sides of the fence.
--
It's ok to say, 'I don't know'. It's even better when someone takes the time to explain what you, 'don't know'.


AkFubar
Admittedly, A Teksavvy Fan

join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN.
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to cynic10
said by cynic10:

Seeing as this is the first time something of this magnitude has occured in Canada, I would expect TSI to fight it. Especially when we know the outcome of it will impact what happens next to all of ISP in Canada.

Give them an inch and they will ask for a mile, ever heard that saying?

If anything, TSI should take heed from this Australian ISP.

ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”
»torrentfreak.com/isp-walks-out-o···-121217/

Someone will be fighting it. CIPPIC has a letter requesting a motion to intervene. The troll will have to have enough proof to compel the judge to grant release of the customers' information as the final decision will rest with the judge. I would imagine some of the alleged might challenge as well if there is a case with chance of reasonable success.

I don't know why people are expecting TSI to challenge this. Every customer should know the terms of service they agreed to when they signed up for TSI service or any other provider's service for that matter (they are all basically the same). How you use your connection is your responsibility not TSI's. No customer information has been released or will be released without a lawful court order. That has always been TSI's position (even when Rocky was in charge) and it has been said here many times before and in their privacy policy as well.
--
If my online experience is enhanced, why are my speeds throttled?? BHell... A Public Futility.


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed

2 edits
said by AkFubar:

said by cynic10:

Seeing as this is the first time something of this magnitude has occured in Canada, I would expect TSI to fight it. Especially when we know the outcome of it will impact what happens next to all of ISP in Canada.

Give them an inch and they will ask for a mile, ever heard that saying?

If anything, TSI should take heed from this Australian ISP.

ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”
»torrentfreak.com/isp-walks-out-o···-121217/

Someone will be fighting it. CIPPIC has a letter requesting a motion to intervene. The troll will have to have enough proof to compel the judge to grant release of the customers' information as the final decision will rest with the judge. I would imagine some of the alleged might challenge as well if there is a case with chance of reasonable success.

I don't know why people are expecting TSI to challenge this. Every customer should know the terms of service they agreed to when they signed up for TSI service or any other provider's service for that matter (they are all basically the same). How you use your connection is your responsibility not TSI's. No customer information has been released or will be released without a lawful court order. That has always been TSI's position (even when Rocky was in charge) and it has been said here many times before and in their privacy policy as well.

Everytime i see you post it's like you've been hired to act as a fanboi. For once i'd love to see an unbiased opinion.

I say this based on your one line "How you use your connection is your responsibility". They aren't guilty dude not yet. Stop acting as if they've already been proven guilty or even the person responsible. You sound like a PR rep for TSI sometimes

Are you honestly so far up their butt or head so deep in the sand that this isn't reality until everyone is by law required to secure their routers/connections from the outside world?

Have you ignored the spoofing topics in your quest to honestly disregard every consumer concern that you simply turn to immediately jump on TSI's defence team every time?

I'm honestly not trying to fight or argue with you, but it astonishes me how much people can truly fanboi a company and not even know it. Microsoft vs Apple for an example.

You're probably a decent guy in real life, no doubt about it but honestly stop being so biased and read between the lines sometimes.

until there is a law, of which strictly prohibits any unsecured routers being manufactured, that requires each user by-law to secure their routers with a minimum encryption your assertion is insane.


AkFubar
Admittedly, A Teksavvy Fan

join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN.
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

2 edits
said by Tx:

said by AkFubar:

said by cynic10:

Seeing as this is the first time something of this magnitude has occured in Canada, I would expect TSI to fight it. Especially when we know the outcome of it will impact what happens next to all of ISP in Canada.

Give them an inch and they will ask for a mile, ever heard that saying?

If anything, TSI should take heed from this Australian ISP.

ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”
»torrentfreak.com/isp-walks-out-o···-121217/

Someone will be fighting it. CIPPIC has a letter requesting a motion to intervene. The troll will have to have enough proof to compel the judge to grant release of the customers' information as the final decision will rest with the judge. I would imagine some of the alleged might challenge as well if there is a case with chance of reasonable success.

I don't know why people are expecting TSI to challenge this. Every customer should know the terms of service they agreed to when they signed up for TSI service or any other provider's service for that matter (they are all basically the same). How you use your connection is your responsibility not TSI's. No customer information has been released or will be released without a lawful court order. That has always been TSI's position (even when Rocky was in charge) and it has been said here many times before and in their privacy policy as well.

Everytime i see you post it's like you've been hired to act as a fanboi. For once i'd love to see an unbiased opinion.

I say this based on your one line "How you use your connection is your responsibility". They aren't guilty dude not yet. Stop acting as if they've already been proven guilty or even the person responsible. You sound like a PR rep for TSI sometimes

Are you honestly so far up their butt or head so deep in the sand that this isn't reality until everyone is by law required to secure their routers/connections from the outside world?

Have you ignored the spoofing topics in your quest to honestly disregard every consumer concern that you simply turn to immediately jump on TSI's defence team every time?

I'm honestly not trying to fight or argue with you, but it astonishes me how much people can truly fanboi a company and not even know it. Microsoft vs Apple for an example.

You're probably a decent guy in real life, no doubt about it but honestly stop being so biased and read between the lines sometimes.

until there is a law, of which strictly prohibits any unsecured routers being manufactured, that requires each user by-law to secure their routers with a minimum encryption your assertion is insane.

Look emotions are running on high here so I'll forgive your B$. You'll notice I used "alleged" instead of "guilty" in my original post. Second I really don't care what you think of me or my perspective. It changes nothing. The situation is still the same and TSI's position is well known as I stated. So flame someone else. Oh and by the way... Cancel that Merry Christmas.
--
If my online experience is enhanced, why are my speeds throttled?? BHell... A Public Futility.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to cynic10
said by cynic10:

Seeing as this is the first time something of this magnitude has occured in Canada, I would expect TSI to fight it. Especially when we know the outcome of it will impact what happens next to all of ISP in Canada.

Give them an inch and they will ask for a mile, ever heard that saying?

If anything, TSI should take heed from this Australian ISP.

ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”
»torrentfreak.com/isp-walks-out-o···-121217/

And those are just talks, ie They don't have to be there.

If a court order comes down telling Teksavvy they have to hand over the information, Teksavvy has no choice but to comply, otherwise they're out of business next day.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
said by resa1983:

said by cynic10:

Seeing as this is the first time something of this magnitude has occured in Canada, I would expect TSI to fight it. Especially when we know the outcome of it will impact what happens next to all of ISP in Canada.

Give them an inch and they will ask for a mile, ever heard that saying?

If anything, TSI should take heed from this Australian ISP.

ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”
»torrentfreak.com/isp-walks-out-o···-121217/

And those are just talks, ie They don't have to be there.

If a court order comes down telling Teksavvy they have to hand over the information, Teksavvy has no choice but to comply, otherwise they're out of business next day.

Out of business? lol... little bit of an exaggeration. We have an appeal process for a reason in north america whereas they can defend the release. Just because a court order says something doesn't mean you jump.

And no, it's not just talks. If you actually read the article, it states the ISP is saying they aren't policing their customers, it's not their job.


JEDI

join:2005-04-11
Longueuil
kudos:1
reply to hm
said by hm :

When I was at walmart the other day, these titles didn't even exist. So I wonder how much "revenue" was really lost.

But, then again, being in Quebec means it just may not be available here since they have to release in both languages. Might be available in the rest of Canada though. No clue.

No they don't have to release in both languages. They only have to do that for the theatrical run. While most DVDs and BDs do have a french track, you can find a bunch that don't have it. There is no law that says that a movie on DVD or BD must have a french audio track.


hm

@videotron.ca
said by JEDI:

said by hm :

When I was at walmart the other day, these titles didn't even exist. So I wonder how much "revenue" was really lost.

But, then again, being in Quebec means it just may not be available here since they have to release in both languages. Might be available in the rest of Canada though. No clue.

No they don't have to release in both languages. They only have to do that for the theatrical run. While most DVDs and BDs do have a french track, you can find a bunch that don't have it. There is no law that says that a movie on DVD or BD must have a french audio track.

I'm not too sure about that.

This is even the law when releases make it to a video rental store.

I don't know your age, even but back in 1990 there was a coplete ban by Paramount Pictures here in Quebec. Paramount Pictures refused to releases movies (or dubs) in French and absorb the cost of that.

So movies like "The Hunt for Red October", released in 1990, And all the Star Trek movies were not available in Quebec only due to the language laws.

In addition to this, the major games that came out a couple of years ago for consoles at Xmas time like, "Rock Band" and/or "Guitar hero's" were not available in Quebec, at all. You could buy the guitar or drum-set for these games. That's it. If you wanted the actual game you had to drive to Ontario or the states to pick it up. And I did this for a few people so they could get their kid their game for Xmas.

Same is true for software in the stores.

So you might want to double check that, and also double check the laws, as well as the history of it all going back since the late 80's.

As far as I know, nothing has changed for retail sales and rentals in this regard.

Who7

join:2012-12-18

2 edits
reply to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

Some legal speak here. For those interested, the legal test I keep talking about is this (its what the Court will have to determine on Monday):

The test is below. Part (a) was changed from a "prima facie" case to "bona fide" by the Court of Appeal. On part (b), being and ISP is considered enough "involvement" to meet the test.

>>>

(a) the applicant must have a bona fide case against the unknown alleged wrongdoer;

I'm trying to make sense why you don't oppose it based on "a".

Does Voltage have a bona fide case that warrants the wholesale invasion of privacy? Are YOU challenging against or demanding proof of that?

You seem to keep going back to the "at this point" you can't do anything and yet, "this point" requires a bona fide case to be proven. Which YOUR customers expect you to demand.

What is going on here?

Note: I hope and I suspect that you realize that the same people who have spread the word about YOUR company and helped you grow, will also turn against you if they don't see you put up a fight. No matter how much you say you "did your best but the court ordered it". You GROW by reputation, you DIE by reputation.


AkFubar
Admittedly, A Teksavvy Fan

join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN.
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

3 edits
said by Who7:

said by TSI Marc:

Some legal speak here. For those interested, the legal test I keep talking about is this (its what the Court will have to determine on Monday):

The test is below. Part (a) was changed from a "prima facie" case to "bona fide" by the Court of Appeal. On part (b), being and ISP is considered enough "involvement" to meet the test.

>>>

(a) the applicant must have a bona fide case against the unknown alleged wrongdoer;

I'm trying to make sense why you don't oppose it based on "a".

Does Voltage have a bona fide case that warrants the wholesale invasion of privacy? Are YOU challenging against or demanding proof of that?

You seem to keep going back to the "at this point" you can't do anything and yet, "this point" requires a bona fide case to be proven. Which YOUR customers expect you to demand.

What is going on here?

Note: I hope and I suspect that you realize that the same people who have spread the word about YOUR company and helped you grow, will also turn against you if they don't see you put up a fight. No matter how much you say you "did your best but the court ordered it". You GROW by reputation, you DIE by reputation.

I think it is up to the Judge to determine whether the case is bona fide. Not Teksavvy. Should the Judge determine from the the Voltage presentation and from CIPPIC intervention that the accusations have no merit, everything stops right there and Teksavvy does not have to hand over the names belonging to the IPs in question. Everyone can go home.

Really it's hard to determine what the best way is. TSI is considered neutral under the Cdn Coypright Act, CIPPIC is a public advocacy group representing ordinary Canadians accused in this issue. It may be best that CIPPIC handles the challenge. At any case altho I cannot speak for TSI (Marc can) I would presume TSI has been in consultation with CIPPIC on this anyway in some capacity.
--
If my online experience is enhanced, why are my speeds throttled?? BHell... A Public Futility.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
said by AkFubar:

said by Who7:

said by TSI Marc:

Some legal speak here. For those interested, the legal test I keep talking about is this (its what the Court will have to determine on Monday):

The test is below. Part (a) was changed from a "prima facie" case to "bona fide" by the Court of Appeal. On part (b), being and ISP is considered enough "involvement" to meet the test.

>>>

(a) the applicant must have a bona fide case against the unknown alleged wrongdoer;

I'm trying to make sense why you don't oppose it based on "a".

Does Voltage have a bona fide case that warrants the wholesale invasion of privacy? Are YOU challenging against or demanding proof of that?

You seem to keep going back to the "at this point" you can't do anything and yet, "this point" requires a bona fide case to be proven. Which YOUR customers expect you to demand.

What is going on here?

Note: I hope and I suspect that you realize that the same people who have spread the word about YOUR company and helped you grow, will also turn against you if they don't see you put up a fight. No matter how much you say you "did your best but the court ordered it". You GROW by reputation, you DIE by reputation.

I think it is up to the Judge to determine whether the case is bona fide. Not Teksavvy. Should the Judge determine from the the Voltage presentation and from CIPPIC intervention that the accusations have no merit, everything stops right there and Teksavvy does not have to hand over the names belonging to the IPs in question. Everyone can go home.

Really it's hard to determine what the best way is. TSI is considered neutral under the Cdn Coypright Act, CIPPIC is a public advocacy group representing ordinary Canadians accused in this issue. It may be best that CIPPIC handles the challenge. At any case altho I cannot speak for TSI (Marc can) I would presume TSI has been in consultation with CIPPIC on this anyway in some capacity.

Problem is that even if Voltage doesn't have a bona fide case, the judge will allow the release of the information simply because the case can't proceed without it. How can someone demonstrate they are going to file a bona fide suit? Just because they've settled a lot of cases in the past doesn't mean it shows intent not to follow through (even though we all know better). My aunt's law office their hope when suing an insurance company is to settle. It's far more profitable for everyone involved than a lengthy expensive trial (especially for the client). If she needs to she'll mop the floor with the insurance company at trial but the majority of the time it doesn't get that far. Is she to be denied the ability to sue simply because she's good enough to get them to settle a lot?

Prima facie has been previously rejected in such cases so there's little hope of that working.

The only thing I can see being viable in this case is joinder. If CIPPIC can force them to split the case into individual cases and make it too costly for them to go after individuals without closing the door on true commercial lawsuits then there might be a chance.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

1 edit
reply to AkFubar
said by AkFubar:

Really it's hard to determine what the best way is. TSI is considered neutral under the Cdn Coypright Act, CIPPIC is a public advocacy group representing ordinary Canadians accused in this issue. It may be best that CIPPIC handles the challenge. At any case altho I cannot speak for TSI (Marc can) I would presume TSI has been in consultation with CIPPIC on this anyway in some capacity.

Yes, but what TSI has in fact done by getting the matter into court at all is to also make it possible for 2000+ lawyers (had those customers who were notified decided to hire independent counsel) - each representing one or more "John Doe's" - be be in court on the 14th - each of whom can represent their own clients rights ---- before TSI is compelled to hand over any data. REMEMBER - TSI didn't just roll over and hand over personal data on-demand ...... as some other ISP's did recently.

The law on what TSI exposes themselves to by taking a really aggressive position on this whole matter is, in my opinion, not as clear cut as it was in 2004 with the BMG case. Maybe TSI can say "me too" once CIPPIC gets standing, ie. that CIPPIC advances the case first might protect TSI in some way (IANAL).

But back to the courtroom on the 14th - each of those 2000+ lawyers can also challenge Voltage on every ground imaginable as well:
- my client doesn't have a computer, he merely pays the bill
- my client is a landlord and supplies an internet connection to 10 people and he has no way of knowing which, if any of them, allegedly infringed
- my client was out of the country at the time
- my client doesn't use any torrent software
- my client is a coffee shop with thousands of patrons per week using wifi - nothing in law requires them to police their patron's actions
- etc.....

If the judge hears stuff like that 2000+ times over the space of a week of hearings, from both CIPPIC & individual lawyers representing John Doe's, Voltage is kicked out the door.

d_source

join:2011-01-18
And let's hope that of those 2000+ who got a letter, at least a small percentage of them or their lawyer representatives show up on the 14th and actually do something at this point. Don't wait till Voltage knows your personal information, do something about it anonymously. This is what TIS has done. This is the opportunity that has been granted. This is the easiest, smartest, cheapest way to resolve this problem. Get your lawyer to make the judge understand why Voltage should not be allowed to pursue anyone on that list and end it all now!

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
Wonder how full the courtroom will be come Monday morning.... There was maybe 2 dozen empty seats last time, and that's with people from other cases sitting and waiting for their case to be heard.

I may need to show up earlier than the 9:05am that I was there last time... Things start about 9:30am.

Also: #teksavvy #voltage#copytroll again?
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
said by resa1983:

Wonder how full the courtroom will be come Monday morning.... There was maybe 2 dozen empty seats last time, and that's with people from other cases sitting and waiting for their case to be heard.

I may need to show up earlier than the 9:05am that I was there last time... Things start about 9:30am.

I'll be there selling tickets for seats
Cash only. Accepting only the new $100 bills - bring plenty with you

morisato

join:2008-03-16
Oshawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·ELECTRONICBOX
reply to TSI Marc
while I hope its full i would be surprised if anyone does anything, Hell anyone could send a lawyer because its john does if they want to pay for a lawyer to go, They are a DOE hence anyone can claim to have an interest in opposing voltage P:)
--
Every time Someone leaves Sympatico an Angel gets its wings.


jedi

@ccc.de
reply to TSI Marc
And what about commercial infringement claim? Money changing hands or accounts? It is clearly a BS designed to raise the extortion sum bar and has to be challenged.

The Mongoose

join:2010-01-05
Toronto, ON
said by jedi :

And what about commercial infringement claim? Money changing hands or accounts? It is clearly a BS designed to raise the extortion sum bar and has to be challenged.

This might be the most glaring weak point of Voltage's case. Even if they do get past this hearing and start suing people, there's virtually no way they can make this stick.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
said by The Mongoose:

said by jedi :

And what about commercial infringement claim? Money changing hands or accounts? It is clearly a BS designed to raise the extortion sum bar and has to be challenged.

This might be the most glaring weak point of Voltage's case. Even if they do get past this hearing and start suing people, there's virtually no way they can make this stick.

Or you know, CIPPIC/TSI could bring up the fact that the program that Canipre uses is extremely flawed, and have lots of proof.. There's been plenty of evidence as to how flawed that program is.

Expect that Monday's hearing will be full of twists and turns people.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

d_source

join:2011-01-18
In order for their to be twists and turns, the people affected need to show up and represent themselves, so at a minimum i'm hoping they are smart enough to do that.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
said by d_source:

In order for their to be twists and turns, the people affected need to show up and represent themselves, so at a minimum i'm hoping they are smart enough to do that.

You're assuming the judge won't allow CIPPIC to intervene?
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

d_source

join:2011-01-18
If I were one of the people affected, i definitely wouldn't rely on that! I'd have my own lawyer in there for sure! I'm not even with TSI and I am going to support the funds being collected to stop this mess. It NEEDS to stop on Monday.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to d_source
said by d_source:

In order for their to be twists and turns, the people affected need to show up and represent themselves, so at a minimum i'm hoping they are smart enough to do that.

Wrong.
They need to have counsel represent them.

Voltage knows nobody's names/addresses now. You want to be an idiot and show up to represent *yourself* - and go on the record with your name & address - fine, be a fool and do that. Next thing you'll be looking at is a subpoena to seize your computer & backups to look for evidence of infringement. That's what I'd do to anyone who *gave up* their identity as you've proposed.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

said by d_source:

In order for their to be twists and turns, the people affected need to show up and represent themselves, so at a minimum i'm hoping they are smart enough to do that.

You're assuming the judge won't allow CIPPIC to intervene?

There is no guarantee that the judge will allow CIPPIC to intervene.

TSI made a deal with Voltage to allow TSI to allow time for TSI to contact those alleged to have infringed to allow them to represent themselves (hopefully via counsel) in court. The 14th is that date.

If no counsel shows up for individuals, and Voltage says "Your Honour, TSI and us had a deal, and now there's there is this CIPPIC thing trying to force their way in - when no counsel of record for anybody showed up, come on - give us a break. We did everything we said we would. The alleged infringers were notified and chose not to represent themselves. Please grant us the order requiring TSI to hand over the names."

If that's the way the 14th played out, and I were the judge, I'd be inclined to agree with Voltage.


amik

@bahnhof.se
reply to resa1983
Noone seems to mention commercial infringement filed by trolls. There is not a shred of evidence of commercial infringement in a first place - where are records of transaction and money changing hands, records of personal financial gain by 2000+ IPs? Correct - there is NONE.

d_source

join:2011-01-18
reply to MaynardKrebs
Yes, sorry, when I say represent themselves, I meant anonymously by sending counsel on their behalf, you are correct.

And you have a very good point. If no counsel appears from the ~2300 affected, why would the judge allow CIPPIC to intervene? Again, if it were me, there's no way I would let this go unfettered.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

1 edit
reply to amik
said by amik :

Noone seems to mention commercial infringement filed by trolls. There is not a shred of evidence of commercial infringement in a first place - where are records of transaction and money changing hands, records of personal financial gain by 2000+ IPs? Correct - there is NONE.

Perhaps all this is true of all ~2000 individuals.
But there is no way of knowing for sure without going to trial, doing examinations for discovery, and forensic analysis on every computer/backup, and bank records.

Voltage isn't going to do that because it would cost them tens of thousands for EACH person to do that, and then when they couldn't prove commercial infringement each defendant would claim $20-$100k in costs against Voltage.

If I were the judge on the 14th and did in fact let Voltage have the names, I would make it a condition that Voltage sue each named person in Federal Court and incur the costs of making their case, rather than simply sending extortion letters. There is NO a priori way of knowing who of the ~2000 actually infringed without going to trial.

----

FYI

The Criminal Code of Canada says this:

346. Extortion

346. (1) Every one commits extortion who, without reasonable justification or excuse and with intent to obtain anything, by threats, accusations, menaces or violence induces or attempts to induce any person, whether or not he is the person threatened, accused or menaced or to whom violence is shown, to do anything or cause anything to be done.

Extortion
(1.1) Every person who commits extortion is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

yada yada yada

Saving
(2) A threat to institute civil proceedings is not a threat for the purposes of this section.


In other words....
346(2) gets Voltage off the criminal hook.


Dr Facts

@gc.ca
reply to d_source
>why would the judge allow CIPPIC to intervene?

I think CIPPIC makes an argument for that in their latest letter? The judge did read their first one so that's could be taken as a positive sign.