UK_Dave
join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico
2 edits | reply to Gruesome
Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday. Gruesome, I like your posts. I have done for the last few days.
And of course, you are absolutely right. Everyone will need to make their own decision as to whether TSI remains their ISP of choice. Personally, the lack of tie-in contracts is why I came to them. I knew if they did something I didn't like, I could bugger off and spend my dollars somewhere else - or not at all (as I did with TV).
Now that doesn't stop me wanting everyone to stay - because I believe a stronger TSI is stronger competition to the incumbents - in the hope that stronger competition leads to more choice. That way maybe more of us can pick and mix EXACTLY what we want from our service providers in the future. Maybe one day we will be able to choose from ones with 90 days logs, ones with no logs, ones with cheaper support yourself options, ones with pricier high grade response times. And a lot of other stuff I can't even think of.
Suppose it turns out (later, much later, when Marc can post freely again, and the judgment has been made) TSI stepped back from fighting this in return for buying time. With that time, CIPPIC was able to get organised (remember how close a call that was in court), I believe their letter of intent to intervene landed on the Judge that same morning. Any later, and I believe disclosure would have been granted. It was that fine a line.
Suppose as a result of this time, and the judgement, there is still no disclosure granted in January. Voltage are sent packing. That maintains a huge defence of precendent against these trolls. The last one bought us 7 years.
Would you still have the view of TSI rolling over too easily? There are a few on the boards who would say "Yes, it's the principal". *"I expect TSI and Marc to go in there, fight, and not stop till they win, or they disappear in a shit tsunami.
And you know what. I think I might have been one of them - were it not that in the back of my mind, I know I'd be grinning like a monkey in a barrel full of bananas knowing that retreat helped win the war despite it not being the glorious death or victory battle I might have wanted to see.
Cheers
Dave
* EDIT 14.12 |
|
Reviews:
·TELUS
| said by UK_Dave:Suppose it turns out (later, much later, when Marc can post freely again, and the judgment has been made) TSI stepped back from fighting this in return for buying time. With that time, CIPPAC was able to get organised (remember how close a call that was in court), I believe their letter of intent to intervene landed on the Judge that same morning. Suppose when TSI was first contacted 6 weeks ago about this impending lawsuit they knew they wouldn't have the resources to fight it and had immediately contacted CIPPIC, or even their fellow ISPs, and asked for help so that when the official papers were received 2 weeks ago they were ready to fight this thing or to push for the same adjournment because they needed more time to respond?
It seems to me that all this bought was time for TSI's customers who will get nasty letters an opportunity to spend thousands of dollars to try to prevent their names from getting released to a company that's going to extort them for thousands of dollars. I'm not sure anyone thinks that is of value?
I still think TSI has a responsibility to ensure that all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed before handing over the identity of any of its subscribers. There isn't an expectation that TSI will defend piracy, just to ensure the court has the right information to ask the right questions to ensure that justice will be possible before names are handed over and people, both innocent and guilty, are extorted. That's my understanding of what happened with the ISPs in the BMG suit.
TSI did more than Distributel, which should be commended. And I'm sure they acted in what they honestly feel (or at least felt) after exploring options and listening to counsel is the right way for themselves and their customers. But I think they could have done more, and I'm still disappointed that they didn't. |
|
UK_Dave
join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico
| Suppose when TSI was first contacted 6 weeks ago about this impending lawsuit they knew they wouldn't have the resources to fight it and had immediately contacted CIPPIC,
----------------------------------------
Who's to say they didn't?
And CIPPIC said "We need time". |
|
Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| said by UK_Dave:Suppose when TSI was first contacted 6 weeks ago about this impending lawsuit they knew they wouldn't have the resources to fight it and had immediately contacted CIPPIC,
----------------------------------------
Who's to say they didn't?
And CIPPIC said "We need time".
+1 |
|
|
|
 TwiztedZeroNine Zero Burp Nine SixPremium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:3
·TekSavvy Cable
1 edit | reply to UK_Dave
said by UK_Dave:And CIPPIC said "We need time".
Need this. Need to fight. They told Zathras
--
IF TREE = FALL AND PEOPLE = ZERO THEN SOUND = 0
Nine.Zero.Burp.Nine.Six
Twitter = Twizted
Chat = irc.teksavvy.ca |
|
resa1983Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:7 Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to The Mongoose
said by The Mongoose:said by UK_Dave:Suppose when TSI was first contacted 6 weeks ago about this impending lawsuit they knew they wouldn't have the resources to fight it and had immediately contacted CIPPIC,
----------------------------------------
Who's to say they didn't?
And CIPPIC said "We need time".
+1 +1
CIPPIC is pretty much always busy. I know that Tamir at CIPPIC is almost always busy with something.
Choosing someone, and possibly clearing their caseload to be able to handle a case like this which will set a new precedent, can't be done that quickly..
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP |
|
