dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
27
Rastan
join:2007-04-25
Canada

Rastan to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc

Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.

Are you saying that you are not opposing Voltage's request for these IP addresses because the Copyright Modernization Act will not allow you to do so? Please elaborate because from my understanding, this new law does not prohibit you from opposing Voltage and mounting an attack on them, similar to the way CIPPIC is trying to intervene.

In my opinion, being an intermediary has nothing to do with privacy issues.

edit: Also, regarding this part:

"parties that bring bona fide lawsuits are entitled to know the identities of the defendants so that they can pursue their claims."

2 things; hasn't that always been the law? Is this really a bona fide lawsuit? Is their intention to bring each of these people to court or are they abusing the system in order to obtain these identities so that they can extort money from them? Based on their track record, I think we all know the answer.
resa1983
Premium Member
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON

resa1983

Premium Member

Wow... CIPPIC's request to intervene, and extend to the new year is realllllly good.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

+1

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to Rastan

Premium Member

to Rastan
said by Rastan:

Are you saying that you are not opposing Voltage's request for these IP addresses because the Copyright Modernization Act will not allow you to do so? Please elaborate because from my understanding, this new law does not prohibit you from opposing Voltage and mounting an attack on them, similar to the way CIPPIC is trying to intervene.

In my opinion, being an intermediary has nothing to do with privacy issues.

edit: Also, regarding this part:

"parties that bring bona fide lawsuits are entitled to know the identities of the defendants so that they can pursue their claims."

2 things; hasn't that always been the law? Is this really a bona fide lawsuit? Is their intention to bring each of these people to court or are they abusing the system in order to obtain these identities so that they can extort money from them? Based on their track record, I think we all know the answer.

I'm saying that its not our place to do so. As soon as we do so, we are now fighting your fight. Our place is to raise awareness and to provide notice so that those who want to show up and defend against this can...

I mean. look, pick up your socks and make your way to court on Monday if you want to defend against this. This is why we chose to go this route. If we went the other route, this would already have been to court. We had to fight to get the time and get Voltage to agree to give us the time in order to provide notice. Odds are this would all be done already had we not have gone this route.

I'm telling you I've looked at this from all angles. You need to wrap your head around it and get in line with what the new laws are saying. All of this effectively amounts to wasted time for those who want to prepare to do something about this if they feel it's the right thing to do.

I'm doing everything I can. I hope that can be seen. I really am.
resa1983
Premium Member
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON

resa1983

Premium Member

said by TSI Marc:

I mean. look, pick up your socks and make your way to court on Monday if you want to defend against this. This is why we chose to go this route. If we went the other route, this would already have been to court. We had to fight to get the time and get Voltage to agree to give us the time in order to provide notice. Odds are this would all be done already had we not have gone this route.

Wow... Not surprising I guess.. Good on you guys then for getting the time to inform people so they could at least have a chance to quash the order.

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

bbbc to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc :

look, pick up your socks and make your way to court on Monday if you want to defend against this. This is why we chose to go this route.

Everything you've stated so far Marc, makes sense, other than this. I just don't think it's realistic for someone out of the province to get to the center of the universe and get representation with such little time.

Can you disclose by provinces how many IPs were alleged to be sharing copyrighted material? What I mean, was every aspect of your wholesale, Bell, Bell Aliant, Cogeco, Rogers, Shaw, TekSavvy Sky Fi, Telus, and Vidéotron touched with a reguest?

QuantumPimp
join:2012-02-19

QuantumPimp to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

I'm saying that its not our place to do so. As soon as we do so, we are now fighting your fight. Our place is to raise awareness and to provide notice so that those who want to show up and defend against this can...

OK. Except that the TSI IP address log retention policy, which is effectively a spying device, has a role in this drama. If I understand correctly, log data is meant to help with the operation of your service and any other use is an invasion of privacy. TSI, it appears, has helped to facilitate that invasion. Am I wrong to think TSI can't step away from the whole situation without some culpability?
said by TSI Marc:

I mean. look, pick up your socks and make your way to court on Monday if you want to defend against this. This is why we chose to go this route. If we went the other route, this would already have been to court. We had to fight to get the time and get Voltage to agree to give us the time in order to provide notice. Odds are this would all be done already had we not have gone this route.

I'm telling you I've looked at this from all angles. You need to wrap your head around it and get in line with what the new laws are saying. All of this effectively amounts to wasted time for those who want to prepare to do something about this if they feel it's the right thing to do.

I'm doing everything I can. I hope that can be seen. I really am.

Mark, your musings go a long way to help the really bright people in this forum understand the issues. Right now the affected customers are just chess pieces caught in a much larger game. Hopefully there has been enough time for resources like CIPPIC to mobilize so that innocent people don't suffer.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to bbbc

Premium Member

to bbbc
said by bbbc:

said by TSI Marc :

look, pick up your socks and make your way to court on Monday if you want to defend against this. This is why we chose to go this route.

Everything you've stated so far Marc, makes sense, other than this. I just don't think it's realistic for someone out of the province to get to the center of the universe and get representation with such little time.

Can you disclose by provinces how many IPs were alleged to be sharing copyrighted material? What I mean, was every aspect of your wholesale, Bell, Bell Aliant, Cogeco, Rogers, Shaw, TekSavvy Sky Fi, Telus, and Vidéotron touched with a reguest?

I think they indicate in their Motion Record that they targeted Toronto.

You're safe. If it were the case that you were out of province.. you would have a good argument to stay the motion... they know that, which is why they targeted a specific area.
TSI Marc

TSI Marc to QuantumPimp

Premium Member

to QuantumPimp
said by QuantumPimp:

said by TSI Marc:

I'm saying that its not our place to do so. As soon as we do so, we are now fighting your fight. Our place is to raise awareness and to provide notice so that those who want to show up and defend against this can...

OK. Except that the TSI IP address log retention policy, which is effectively a spying device, has a role in this drama. If I understand correctly, log data is meant to help with the operation of your service and any other use is an invasion of privacy. TSI, it appears, has helped to facilitate that invasion. Am I wrong to think TSI can't step away from the whole situation without some culpability?
said by TSI Marc:

I mean. look, pick up your socks and make your way to court on Monday if you want to defend against this. This is why we chose to go this route. If we went the other route, this would already have been to court. We had to fight to get the time and get Voltage to agree to give us the time in order to provide notice. Odds are this would all be done already had we not have gone this route.

I'm telling you I've looked at this from all angles. You need to wrap your head around it and get in line with what the new laws are saying. All of this effectively amounts to wasted time for those who want to prepare to do something about this if they feel it's the right thing to do.

I'm doing everything I can. I hope that can be seen. I really am.

Mark, your musings go a long way to help the really bright people in this forum understand the issues. Right now the affected customers are just chess pieces caught in a much larger game. Hopefully there has been enough time for resources like CIPPIC to mobilize so that innocent people don't suffer.

I agree that log retention plays a role here. I started a discussion here:

»Discussion about log retention

First off, we don't spy.. nothing we log has anything to do with anything other than the IP, time/date, in/out packets.

I explain in that other thread why we for sure need logs. We just can't operate properly without them. They're essential to a healthy ISP. So, the question is more, in cases like this where it's a civil matter, should third parties have access to this info.. right now the law says yes...

No, we could shorten the period of time we log. But, all they need to do once the new notice and notice regime comes into effect is send us a notice for each and every single infringement they can find.. shortening the period of time doesn't really fix anything it just ups the ante if you will.
johansmith
join:2012-12-15

johansmith

Member

said by TSI Marc:

I agree that log retention plays a role here. I started a discussion here:

»Discussion about log retention

First off, we don't spy.. nothing we log has anything to do with anything other than the IP, time/date, in/out packets.

I explain in that other thread why we for sure need logs. We just can't operate properly without them. They're essential to a healthy ISP. So, the question is more, in cases like this where it's a civil matter, should third parties have access to this info.. right now the law says yes...

And you have been given examples ad-nauseum as to what European ISPs do with NO LOGS and they are doing just fine thank you very much. It is jut spin. Bull. ISP's can certainly operate just fine without them. Don't spread more propaganda.
said by TSI Marc:

No, we could shorten the period of time we log. But, all they need to do once the new notice and notice regime comes into effect is send us a notice for each and every single infringement they can find.. shortening the period of time doesn't really fix anything it just ups the ante if you will.

In other words, the other tread is just smoke and mirrors. Your decision is already taken. Thank you very much for requesting input.

And again, more bull. So they send you a notice. So you reply back you have no log of such IP on such-and-such date. How *exactly* does this up the ante???? Answer: it does not. You are just blowing smoke.