 AkFubarAdmittedly, A Teksavvy Fan
join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN. |
to TSI Marc
Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.IMHO TSI is doing what they have always done, a hands off approach to your account. What you use your account for is up to you. However even Rocky had mentioned that no customer info would be released without a court order. I would imagine if your case went to trial and if your lawyer required it, a technical expert from TSI could be made available to testify. In fact I am almost sure that this would be part of your defense. |
|
 your moderator at work
 hidden :
|
 Txbronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium Member
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON |
Tx to AkFubar
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 4:16 am
to AkFubar
Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.said by AkFubar:IMHO TSI is doing what they have always done, a hands off approach to your account. What you use your account for is up to you. However even Rocky had mentioned that no customer info would be released without a court order. I would imagine if your case went to trial and if your lawyer required it, a technical expert from TSI could be made available to testify. In fact I am almost sure that this would be part of your defense.
You realize what you're saying? You're saying you're almost sure TSi would send out an expert to 2300 different cases... and this is the first round |
|
| |
I'm guessing most people will settle out of court so the really important opportunity to fight this is now. |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium Member
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON |
Tx
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 4:24 am
said by ultramancool:I'm guessing most people will settle out of court so the really important opportunity to fight this is now.
I'd bet less then half will settle out of court quite honestly. This is too new here so no one has really set any standards as to what happens yet. And the best part, someone thinks Teksavvy has the resources to send an expert to each case that does go to court. I mean, get real. One sentence, "Teksavvy and hands off approach like they always have" then ends off by saying they will send an expert to your aid in a trial. I get it, people love Teksavvy, but sometimes they love them a little too much and give far too much credit where it isn't due. I can imagine Marc's head spinning thinking of sending guys to each court case, and as i said, this is the first round lol.... the game just began |
|
|
| |
ChuckcZar
Anon
2012-Dec-15 6:56 am
Maybe, maybe not things will be quite a bit different in Canada with the $5,000 cap. Cases can be tried in small claims court unlike in America where the maximum is $150,000. Going to small claims court would cost Voltage next to nothing. |
|
AkFubarAdmittedly, A Teksavvy Fan
join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN. |
to Tx
said by Tx:said by AkFubar:IMHO TSI is doing what they have always done, a hands off approach to your account. What you use your account for is up to you. However even Rocky had mentioned that no customer info would be released without a court order. I would imagine if your case went to trial and if your lawyer required it, a technical expert from TSI could be made available to testify. In fact I am almost sure that this would be part of your defense.
You realize what you're saying? You're saying you're almost sure TSi would send out an expert to 2300 different cases... and this is the first round Well, people's lawyers may require that as part of their defense. I suppose a defense lawyer would request a summons or subpoena if need be for expert testimony if they feel it will help their case. So there may not be a choice. It is a real possibility. |
|
 TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
1 recommendation |
to Tx
Tx, I know you're upset.
I have given this a massive amount of energy, resources, money, multiple lawyers and experts. You name it. I've looked at it. This is not me rolling over.
If there was more I could do to protect your privacy, I would do it. I just don't have a hook.
Whatever behavior our customer engage in is not for us to scrutinize. If we wade into that, we are essentially going against Net Neutrality principles that we fought for.
It really boils down to this: If these new Copyright laws are meant to make guilty anybody who intends to distribute Copyrighted works. And if the technology exists to track such activity. Then there is really nothing else we can do. It's the law. The law is the law. I can't defend against the law. The laws are there to defend against bad things. If we defend against laws, that makes us bad. We dont do that. We've never done that.
A few weeks back there was another case where Canipre was involved, it set the precedent.. only thing different here is the number of users requested. |
|
| |
drjp81 to Tx
Member
2012-Dec-15 11:36 am
to Tx
said by Tx:
I can imagine Marc's head spinning thinking of sending guys to each court case, and as i said, this is the first round lol.... the game just began
True but then I'm afraid, if I was a defendant, I would have to subpoena them as an expert witness for my defence, because after all, they are the only party with *any* knowledge of what I do online and how any of my data is handled passed my modem. I cannot even say with a degree of certitude that my IP was, what it was, when they say it was. And that is exactly what TSI is handing over to Voltage. I would think it's easier to nip this in the bud. Go in front of a judge and challenge the request, based on it's technical merit period. Instead of getting subpoenaed X hundred in the course of so many defense cases. This position may not favor them at all. Besides, like said before, once they (voltage) have this data, who is to ensure they use it ethically, and not just sell it to a spam-house? |
|
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 11:41 am
said by drjp81:***if I was a defendant, I would have to subpoena them as an expert witness for my defence, because after all, they are the only party with *any* knowledge of what I do online and how any of my data is handled passed my modem. Again, we have *no* knowledge of what you do or any of our customers do online. |
|
| |
drjp81
Member
2012-Dec-15 11:58 am
said by TSI Marc:said by drjp81:***if I was a defendant, I would have to subpoena them as an expert witness for my defence, because after all, they are the only party with *any* knowledge of what I do online and how any of my data is handled passed my modem. Again, we have *no* knowledge of what you do or any of our customers do online. Hi Marc. First, please don't take this as criticism. There will be plenty of that to go around. I'm just throwing things out there hoping it will help anyone, including you guys. I've not been mailed about this case so I really don't have any vested interest in this debate. I try to put myself in your shoes, what would worry me. So look at it as brain storming. I honestly find the request for 2000 IPs in the given period of time on the said media titles, fishy. Don't you? That being said allow me to retort: who else knows what IP I obtained during any time but you and MAYBE I? How my packets are handled when they negotiate with canpire's infrastructure? What my data should look like if it is unmolested, versus if it was manipulated. The MAC address info in the headers of packets of a wireshark log are deceptively easy to change, but since a good number of these are yours, who else can authenticate them and how they should have been handled? I agree that you may not have records of this, but you *are* an expert on how these things work, and the only ones with knowledge of how it's all fed/sent throughout the internet. As I said, I would have made this a point in front of a judge before handing out the data. It will come back to haunt you, I am almost certain. But I may be accused of being paranoid. Some guys on here understand these things a lot better than I can fathom, and one of them is bound to figure out how you are implicated (technically as a transport as it may be) in explaining how, likely or not, things happened as Voltage is alleging. |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 12:15 pm
said by drjp81:said by TSI Marc:said by drjp81:***if I was a defendant, I would have to subpoena them as an expert witness for my defence, because after all, they are the only party with *any* knowledge of what I do online and how any of my data is handled passed my modem. Again, we have *no* knowledge of what you do or any of our customers do online. Hi Marc. First, please don't take this as criticism. There will be plenty of that to go around. I'm just throwing things out there hoping it will help anyone, including you guys. I've not been mailed about this case so I really don't have any vested interest in this debate. I try to put myself in your shoes, what would worry me. So look at it as brain storming. I honestly find the request for 2000 IPs in the given period of time on the said media titles, fishy. Don't you? That being said allow me to retort: who else knows what IP I obtained during any time but you and MAYBE I? How my packets are handled when they negotiate with canpire's infrastructure? What my data should look like if it is unmolested, versus if it was manipulated. The MAC address info in the headers of packets of a wireshark log are deceptively easy to change, but since a good number of these are yours, who else can authenticate them and how they should have been handled? I agree that you may not have records of this, but you *are* an expert on how these things work, and the only ones with knowledge of how it's all fed/sent throughout the internet. As I said, I would have made this a point in front of a judge before handing out the data. It will come back to haunt you, I am almost certain. But I may be accused of being paranoid. Some guys on here understand these things a lot better than I can fathom, and one of them is bound to figure out how you are implicated (technically as a transport as it may be) in explaining how, likely or not, things happened as Voltage is alleging. All good. No offence taken. I think this is all important dialogue. "I honestly find the request for 2000 IPs in the given period of time on the said media titles, fishy. Don't you?" If I get into that, I'm wading into the merits of their case. Certainly, nothing I would say, couldn't be said by anybody else on Monday. That's the point about the notice period. It's why I'm here now *ahead* of Monday. Anybody can read anything here and if they don't like it, show up on Monday and make your case. Are you going to be there on Monday? Why not? For the logs.. I agree that this plays a role but I'm not certain exactly what role it plays yet. It's why I started that other thread. |
|
| |
to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:said by drjp81:***if I was a defendant, I would have to subpoena them as an expert witness for my defence, because after all, they are the only party with *any* knowledge of what I do online and how any of my data is handled passed my modem. Again, we have *no* knowledge of what you do or any of our customers do online. Neither does Voltage, nor the court, nor anybody else but the person doing the deed, and any witness to this deed. Right now, Voltage only has IPs. But since you agreed not to oppose, Voltage will soon have the names associated with those IPs. You and I know exactly what comes next. You know what? I'll stick with TSI anyway, cuz TSI has been good to me, and the alternatives are worse than the devil. But promise me something, will you? You won't do it again. |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 12:30 pm
said by JonyBelGeul:said by TSI Marc:said by drjp81:***if I was a defendant, I would have to subpoena them as an expert witness for my defence, because after all, they are the only party with *any* knowledge of what I do online and how any of my data is handled passed my modem. Again, we have *no* knowledge of what you do or any of our customers do online. Neither does Voltage, nor the court, nor anybody else but the person doing the deed, and any witness to this deed. Right now, Voltage only has IPs. But since you agreed not to oppose, Voltage will soon have the names associated with those IPs. You and I know exactly what comes next. You know what? I'll stick with TSI anyway, cuz TSI has been good to me, and the alternatives are worse than the devil. But promise me something, will you? You won't do it again. Lets see how this all turns out in the end. I'm not sure yet it will be bad for consumers. |
|
1 edit
1 recommendation |
Reading the CIPPIC letter. It's fantastic. They actually refer to Voltage as trolls.
Less amusing: Apparently Voltage is pursuing this under the commercial infringement statue. That's madness. It's a blatantly ridiculous and unsupported allegation that weakens Voltage's position enormously if properly exposed. The downside is that if the court ignores this, Voltage can sue these users for hundreds of thousands of dollars each. The $5,000 limit won't apply. |
|
| |
drjp81
Member
2012-Dec-15 12:49 pm
said by The Mongoose:Reading the CIPPIC letter. It's fantastic. They actually refer to Voltage as trolls.
Less amusing: Apparently Voltage is pursuing this under the commercial infringement statue. That's madness. It's a blatantly ridiculous and unsupported allegation that weakens Voltage's position enormously if properly exposed. The downside is that if the court ignores this, Voltage can sue these users for hundreds of thousands of dollars each. The $5,000 limit won't apply.
But it's a great gamble. It's much worth paying a few tousand dollars in costs with a potential revenue in the hundreds of thousands, than for 5000$. And if per chance, dumb luck or incompetence of the defence they win a single case, then they have millions for the future because of it's precedent. I wouldn't go as far as call them cunning, but they're obviously not doing this blindly. |
|
| |
to TSI Marc
"Whatever behavior our customer engage in is not for us to scrutinize. If we wade into that, we are essentially going against Net Neutrality principles that we fought for."
You're right it's not for you to scrutinize, but at this point no one is suggesting that you make any findings of customer behaviour. At this point though they are innocent and requesting that you do you best to protect the information they gave you.
You are never going to be neutral, you will be judged on this one way or another.
A half hearted attempt to protect their privacy would have been enough.
This has nothing to with the accusation |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 1:39 pm
We fought to have the ability to notify everybody. That's the key here. While we're all reading here or typing.. any of you could be gearing up to do something on Monday.
There's lots of smart people here. We've seen it more than once what one person can do.
We're even willing to inform those that may be involved in this if somebody is getting legal representation.. assuming that lawyer of firm is willing to be named... |
|
| |
On that issue, Marc - and please excuse my ignorance here.
How will the case allow submissions from the gallery?
Would we have to give notice to speak?
Do we raise our hands and wait to be called?
Does anyone else have experience of this in Ontario? |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 1:43 pm
said by UK_Dave:On that issue, Marc - and please excuse my ignorance here.
How will the case allow submissions from the gallery?
Would we have to give notice to speak?
Do we raise our hands and wait to be called?
Does anyone else have experience of this in Ontario?
You need to get legal representation to understand how that works. |
|
| |
to TSI Marc
I agree but some may not have done anything and are not sure what to do, or even afford a lawyer.
I'm not named on this list and I won't ever be named on a list but this feels all wrong, giving up the personal information of your clients without even a minimal effort at defending that data seems like abetting extortion. I say extortion because if it quacks like a duck etc.
I'm not even involved but I gave money to the defence fund.
This action is reprehensible, in my book no one in good conscience should give in easily or stand by and watch it happen.
Just because it's legal doesn't make it right. |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 2:40 pm
said by Gruesome:I agree but some may not have done anything and are not sure what to do, or even afford a lawyer.
I'm not named on this list and I won't ever be named on a list but this feels all wrong, giving up the personal information of your clients without even a minimal effort at defending that data seems like abetting extortion. I say extortion because if it quacks like a duck etc.
I'm not even involved but I gave money to the defence fund.
This action is reprehensible, in my book no one in good conscience should give in easily or stand by and watch it happen.
Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.
Whatever they may have done in other countries just doesn't matter here. In Canada, there is no such history. The best way to make sure you're not involved in anything like this though is to not engage in the behavior they're alleging... If there are rampant errors that were made in the data they collected.. surely that will come out. |
|
| |
Hey Marc,
Just a quick one before I grab a quick afternoon pint...
I mentioned earlier re: log accuracy...
Would you be prepared to put a finger in the air and say your internal, voluntary, logs are 100% accurate? |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 2:45 pm
said by UK_Dave:Hey Marc,
Just a quick one before I grab a quick afternoon pint...
I mentioned earlier re: log accuracy...
Would you be prepared to put a finger in the air and say your internal, voluntary, logs are 100% accurate?
As accurate as any other ISP... |
|
| |
As bad as that?!
For once I'm glad that TSI isn't leading the way over their rivals.... heh heh
And, cough, thanks for the answer.... |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2012-Dec-15 2:54 pm
..not sure I've ever heard of a case where logs, these kinds of logs, were proven to be inaccurate. |
|
|
your moderator at work
hidden :
|
| |
to TSI Marc
Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.So we'll just assume they're not here to extort people because they've only done that so far in other countries?
And don't engage in something you're alleged to have done?....wonderful.
Sounds like you think this behaviour is more than alleged |
|
| Gruesome |
to TSI Marc
is that the answer you'll give when subpoenaed to testify in each court case? |
|
TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON |
to Gruesome
said by Gruesome:So we'll just assume they're not here to extort people because they've only done that so far in other countries?
And don't engage in something you're alleged to have done?....wonderful.
Sounds like you think this behaviour is more than alleged
others are already making that case.. as a result of having the notice.. |
|
