| I am not affected but I am worried / thinking to abandon TSI I have numerous Teksavvy services. I have been alarmed by the recent development of company directions.
I am worried.
1. How do we know if dyanmic IP log is accurate? What if there is an error in time clock resulting in false accusation?
2. How do we know if Teksavvy will even maintain the log properly?
For these reasons, I am thinking to terminate my Teksavvy internet services. They are worried about getting sued. So am I, so I am going somewhere else. I would not like to take a chance, just like Teksavvy does not like to take a chance in order to fight for privacy.
I am voting with my wallet! |
|
 TSI GabePremium,VIP
join:2007-01-03
Chatham, ON
kudos:2 | I've worked for many ISP in my life. And I can assure you that every single one of them will turn you in on a court order.
The only difference about it in this case is that we were open about it which makes me proud to work for TekSavvy.
And to address your questions, all our servers are NTP synchronized to a stratum-1 clock source.
--
TSI Gabe - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.
Authorized TSI employee ( »TekSavvy FAQ »Official support in the forum )
|
|
1 edit | reply to MoreFaxes
said by MoreFaxes:For these reasons, I am thinking to terminate my Teksavvy internet services. They are worried about getting sued. So am I, so I am going somewhere else. I would not like to take a chance, just like Teksavvy does not like to take a chance in order to fight for privacy.
I am voting with my wallet!
...What?
Do you seriously believe that whichever ISP you move to will fight for your privacy more-so than TSI, or would keep logs for less than 90 days, or would not be subject to the same laws and types of court orders?
Really?
Please enlighten us with which ISP you're considering moving to. Bell? Rogers?
Any of the big incumbents would hang you out to dry faster than you could blink; all they care about is pure profit and they will not spend a penny of said profit to defend their customers' privacy. I can also guarantee their log retention is far longer than TSI, so don't kid yourself if that's where you're heading. I'd also find it laughable if you think that a big bureaucratic incumbent's logging accuracy would outweigh that of TSI's.
As for other smaller ISPs similar to TSI? Yes, there are quite a few. But I think you'd be quite hard-pressed to find one that is nearly as open and honest about how they handle their operations and legal challenges as TSI.
I'm all for voting with one's wallet, but please be smart about the premise of your decision. |
|
UK_Dave
join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2 | reply to MoreFaxes
Re: I am not affected but I am worried / thinking to abandon TSI Where are you going to go to, maybe an incumbent desperately trying to keep threats away from its legacy TV media business model.... |
|
| reply to MoreFaxes
said by MoreFaxes:I have numerous Teksavvy services. I have been alarmed by the recent development of company directions.
I am worried.
1. How do we know if dyanmic IP log is accurate? What if there is an error in time clock resulting in false accusation?
2. How do we know if Teksavvy will even maintain the log properly?
For these reasons, I am thinking to terminate my Teksavvy internet services. They are worried about getting sued. So am I, so I am going somewhere else. I would not like to take a chance, just like Teksavvy does not like to take a chance in order to fight for privacy.
I am voting with my wallet!
Wow, where to start.
1. Dynamic IP logging accuracy is determined in a court of law, regardless of which ISP you are using. That is why we are innocent until proven guilty. The accuser would have to prove you actually downloaded or shared the content in question, the burden of proof is on the rights holder not the individual.
2. How can you be sure Bell Canada maintains correct logs, cell logs, land line call logs? You cannot, which is why again, the burden of proof lies on the rights holder. Simply connecting you to an IP they believe violated their copyright is not enough proof in any court.
If you are worried about getting sued, then don't download and share pirated media. If you have not pirated content, then you are not guilty of anything and you will win every time.
--
Matt |
|
 TwiztedZeroNine Zero Burp Nine SixPremium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:3
 ·TekSavvy Cable
| said by mattvmotas:If you are worried about getting sued, then don't download and share pirated media. If you have not pirated content, then you are not guilty of anything and you will win every time.
Except, occassionally someone's modem's mac address is forged and used without their knowledge.
IP's can be spoofed
MAC's can be spoofed.
Trojans and Botnets can exaserbate the situation without the user knowing.
those are just a few examples, I'm sure there are more.
Whether or not you've downloaded infringing material the point of this sort of shake down is to compell you to pay up front or otherwise to go court and go into further financial difficulty innocent or not. Its an underhanded extortion scheme fishing expedition, where these troll companies use the courts to facilitate their twisted business model. See the CIPPIC paper here for a little clairification.
We're not discussing a life threatening or federal crime here.
This is a civil matter.
--
IF TREE = FALL AND PEOPLE = ZERO THEN SOUND = 0
Nine.Zero.Burp.Nine.Six
Twitter = Twizted
Chat = irc.teksavvy.ca |
|
|
|
| said by TwiztedZero:We're not discussing a life threatening or federal crime here.
This is a civil matter.
Agreed.
But it can cost you fifty thousands dollars in lawyer & expert witness fees to fight even if you're innocent. Not many people have that kind of cash laying around. |
|
 sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to mattvmotas
said by mattvmotas:1. Dynamic IP logging accuracy is determined in a court of law, regardless of which ISP you are using. That is why we are innocent until proven guilty. The accuser would have to prove you actually downloaded or shared the content in question, the burden of proof is on the rights holder not the individual.
2. How can you be sure Bell Canada maintains correct logs, cell logs, land line call logs? You cannot, which is why again, the burden of proof lies on the rights holder. Simply connecting you to an IP they believe violated their copyright is not enough proof in any court.
If you are worried about getting sued, then don't download and share pirated media. If you have not pirated content, then you are not guilty of anything and you will win every time.
Innocent until proven guilty and its adjunct "beyond reasonable doubt" do not apply in civil cases.
Each party will make its claim and the judge will make a decision based on the preponderance of the evidence. In civil law, the standard of proof is either proof by a preponderance of the evidence or proof by clear and convincing evidence. These are lower burdens of proof than beyond reasonable doubt
A preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other, even by the smallest degree. Clear and convincing evidence is evidence that establishes a high probability that the fact sought to be proved is true.
So, if Voltage can convince the judge 50.01% that you did it, you will be found against. Of course, the less clear and convincing the case by Voltage, in all probability the monetary finding of copyright damages will probably be reduced.
Remember this isn't guilty and innocent - that's for criminal cases. This is about damages and convincing a judge that you owe don't owe the claimant money. |
|
 Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3
 ·TekSavvy DSL
 ·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to MoreFaxes
said by MoreFaxes:I have numerous Teksavvy services. I have been alarmed by the recent development of company directions.
I am worried.
1. How do we know if dyanmic IP log is accurate? What if there is an error in time clock resulting in false accusation?
2. How do we know if Teksavvy will even maintain the log properly?
For these reasons, I am thinking to terminate my Teksavvy internet services. They are worried about getting sued. So am I, so I am going somewhere else. I would not like to take a chance, just like Teksavvy does not like to take a chance in order to fight for privacy.
I am voting with my wallet!
Though i wish TSI would shove it up their loving behind and challenge the order and set it's own precedence that we're not going to be bullied, i have to say this...
I trust in Gabe, Marc and company to maintain accuracy with logging far more then i would Bell, Rogers, Telus and so on. End of the day right now information is being handed over. I'd trust a transparent company to hand over accurate information over other companies that make it a practice to defraud you and make your life hell on a daily basis |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to mattvmotas
If you are worried about getting sued, then don't download and share pirated media. If you have not pirated content, then you are not guilty of anything and you will win every time.
Me for example. I had no notice and i knew i wouldn't. That said, if i was to be accused that means i now have to take time off work, hire a lawyer to prove my innocence. If you don't see the logic in this then i don't know if you ever will. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Mobilicity
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..
·CIKTEL Telecom
·TekSavvy Cable
| said by Tx:If you are worried about getting sued, then don't download and share pirated media. If you have not pirated content, then you are not guilty of anything and you will win every time.
Wow what a silly comment. Point is and i have to emphasize this strongly. People DO NOT WANT to deal with the courts to prove their innocence. That costs money and a lot of time. Me for example. I had no notice and i knew i wouldn't. That said, if i was to be accused that means i now have to take time off work, hire a lawyer to prove my innocence. If you don't see the logic in this then i don't know if you ever will. Let me make sure I understand what you are saying. Are you saying that;
1) People should be able to download and share whatever they want despite copyright law?
2) In addition, the hypothetical user in #1 should also be free from any lawsuits from the copyright owner who owns the content that never gave authorization whatsoever to the aforementioned user to have their content?
Wow, talk about a sense of entitlement.
The "victims" being sued knew the copyright owner didn't want them to have their content without authorization. For years the "victims" have been using a loophole in the law to watch and download that content anyways. Now they are upset that the copyright owners are also using underhanded legal loopholes to get damages?
I really don't know what to say. |
|
| No, he's not saying that. He's saying that some of the IPs targeted will be people who had nothing to do with illegal file sharing, and that they will now have to prove they didn't do anything illegal. |
|
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to Doctor
Hello Doctor,
I have been monitoring your internet activities and see that you have been downloading and uploading copyrighted material through the use of P2P/USENET. I have used Canipre to confirm that your IP belongs to Teksavvy. As such, I will be suing you for the amount of up to $10,000 in lost revenue from your actions after the court orders Teksavvy to hand over your name.
blah blah blah, court orders Teksavvy to hand over your information.
I take you to court along with the help of Canipre. And we provide evidence that the IP in fact belongs to you and that during Sept 1. to Oct 31 you used 10 GB in downloading/uploading. Thus, we can confirm 100% that it was you.
Now its up to you to prove that it wasn't you. But, I don't care, I have enough money to keep attacking you in court.
Now, you'll reply with it "I KNOW I DIDN'T DOWNLOAD ANYTHING ILLEGAL SO YOU CAN'T SUE ME". But my dear Doctor, I do not care. I have your IP, your name and the bandwidth you used. It is you. I made it all up too and you can't prove it. Thanks for the $10, 000.
Now, I'll target your fellow idiot ISP customers.
I can extort you for all I want. And there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to Doctor
said by Doctor:said by Tx:If you are worried about getting sued, then don't download and share pirated media. If you have not pirated content, then you are not guilty of anything and you will win every time.
Wow what a silly comment. Point is and i have to emphasize this strongly. People DO NOT WANT to deal with the courts to prove their innocence. That costs money and a lot of time. Me for example. I had no notice and i knew i wouldn't. That said, if i was to be accused that means i now have to take time off work, hire a lawyer to prove my innocence. If you don't see the logic in this then i don't know if you ever will. Let me make sure I understand what you are saying. Are you saying that; 1) People should be able to download and share whatever they want despite copyright law? 2) In addition, the hypothetical user in #1 should also be free from any lawsuits from the copyright owner who owns the content that never gave authorization whatsoever to the aforementioned user to have their content? Wow, talk about a sense of entitlement. The "victims" being sued knew the copyright owner didn't want them to have their content without authorization. For years the "victims" have been using a loophole in the law to watch and download that content anyways. Now they are upset that the copyright owners are also using underhanded legal loopholes to get damages? I really don't know what to say. Might i suggest you re-read? What does copyright law have to do with being wrongfully accused? I love your method of empathizing on "victims" like everyone to you is a criminal should they be on the list of these 2300 users.
Before going on about your sense of entitlement theory, maybe you should stop with the assumptions and think of those who are truly innocent and wrongfully accused.
You strike me as one of those metaphor and air quoting type.
Let me point out the part "doctor" you seemed to have "missed".
"To prove their innocence" - Unless you are one of those who believe everyone of those 2300 users are guilty because you say so. |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to enzymes
said by enzymes:Hello Doctor,
I have been monitoring your internet activities and see that you have been downloading and uploading copyrighted material through the use of P2P/USENET. I have used Canipre to confirm that your IP belongs to Teksavvy. As such, I will be suing you for the amount of up to $10,000 in lost revenue from your actions after the court orders Teksavvy to hand over your name.
blah blah blah, court orders Teksavvy to hand over your information.
I take you to court along with the help of Canipre. And we provide evidence that the IP in fact belongs to you and that during Sept 1. to Oct 31 you used 10 GB in downloading/uploading. Thus, we can confirm 100% that it was you.
Now its up to you to prove that it wasn't you. But, I don't care, I have enough money to keep attacking you in court.
Now, you'll reply with it "I KNOW I DIDN'T DOWNLOAD ANYTHING ILLEGAL SO YOU CAN'T SUE ME". But my dear Doctor, I do not care. I have your IP, your name and the bandwidth you used. It is you. I made it all up too and you can't prove it. Thanks for the $10, 000.
Now, I'll target your fellow idiot ISP customers.
I can extort you for all I want. And there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.
You pretty much played it out perfectly and "Doctor" seemed to have missed this point i was getting at above. It's not the illegal activity i'm questioning, it's the methods, the mass suits. Now it's up to each person to defend themselves, that costs money and time.
Those like myself who are innocent if i were to be accused for any reason. Instead, Doctors thought process is, if you're accused you're a pirate right out of the gate. |
|
| reply to The Mongoose
Correct me if iam wrong but these cases hold 5000 limit, i seriously doubt voltage would want to go to war over what could be a 100 dollars in damages. The only winners are the lawyers which is not what the people behind voltage are aiming for. |
|
Reviews:
·Mobilicity
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..
·CIKTEL Telecom
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to Tx
You both are giving extreme examples and you both know it. The core issue here is being able to download copyrighted materials as a "right" with no repercussions whatsoever.
You also fail to mention that less than %1 of the cases here will end up being innocent people. There are so many people downloading copyrighted torrents that there is no need to fake IP's and you both must be well aware of that.
I will agree with both of you, there is something "not right" here and I don't agree at all with the methods this company is trying to get money out of people. But I disagree with the methods for honest reasons and I'm not trying to use it as a scapegoat to abandon prosecution of people with pirated material entirely.
How could they have gotten these IP's? Oh yeah;
1) They prowl the linux torrents and wait for people to enter the swarm and record their IP address.
2) They set up phishing websites and record all the ip's going to their website.
Let's see how long their lawyers will keep their license employing methods like this.
Give me a break. |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| said by Doctor:You both are giving extreme examples and you both know it. The core issue here is being able to download copyrighted materials as a "right" with no repercussions whatsoever.
You also fail to mention that less than %1 of the cases here will end up being innocent people. There are so many people downloading copyrighted torrents that there is no need to fake IP's and you both must be well aware of that.
I will agree with both of you, there is something "not right" here and I don't agree at all with the methods this company is trying to get money out of people. But I disagree with the methods for honest reasons and I'm not trying to use it as a scapegoat to abandon prosecution of people with pirated material entirely.
How could they have gotten these IP's? Oh yeah;
1) They prowl the linux torrents and wait for people to enter the swarm and record their IP address.
2) They set up phishing websites and record all the ip's going to their website.
Let's see how long their lawyers will keep their license employing methods like this.
Give me a break.
Less then 1%? Do you know something everyone else doesn't? These guys are extortionists. Read the news buddy, i think you're out of touch with reality. IP != a person. That's the sole problem. End of story.
If you or anyone you know so much as downloaded a song or an app you thought was free you're now a pirate, you can plead ignorance but fact is, there are so many innocent people who just do not know better. Our examples are not extreme examples, go read some stories on torrentfreak.com.
Their pay up or else scheme is a is a scam. It's extortion because those who may actually be innocent as an IP != a person will pay up to avoid court. Lastly the things the industry doesn't brag about publicly is these "pirates" drive up sales, the pirates themselves statistically have shown to be the ones who buy more often then not.
Me saying that is not making or saying it's right, but the copyright and the industry refuses to adapt to the future of what is now.
I speak from experience, my elderly father was wrongfully accused 2 years ago, and thought fighting it (in the states) was his best bet since he as innocent. I know 100% he was, but he lost.
These cases the burden of proof should be on Voltage, but it's not, it's on the end user. I'm saying THAT is the part that is very unfair to all the end users. Lastly, copyright in north american is treated far more harshly then murder. If you cannot see what's twisted with this then i honestly don't know what to say.
I argue with reason, because i stood beside someone who went through this whole ordeal and has since filed bankruptcy due to it.
It's not about faking an IP, it's that an IP is not a person. It does not identify without a reasonable doubt a person, a name |
|
 elitefx
join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:1 | reply to Tx
said by Tx:.......if you're accused you're a pirate right out of the gate.
Actually, it's the Canadian way. There is no justice in Canada. A trial is a liar's convention. Those with the most convincing tale win. Justice is cash driven. And the high priced lawyers involved are the ultimate winners in the end.
Canadian justice isn't based on truth or evidence. It's based on expert opinion presenting the evidence. Money talks. Bullshit walks. Those with the deepest pockets and most influencial witness wins.
Once your name appears on the docket you're GUILTY AS CHARGED. It's the Canadian (and dare I say the North American) way of doing things.
Nobody cares if the guilty party is convicted. As long as somebody is convicted. Canadians want CONVICTIONS for justice to APPEAR to be done.
So if your names on the list, Bend over and kiss your ass and cash goodbye. It's going to be a looong appeal filled bumpy ride before you get your next good nite's sleep. |
|
