dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
25

hm
@videotron.ca

hm to elitefx

Anon

to elitefx

Re: Voltage-Hurt Locker Lawsuit Round 2 Against Teksavvy Users

said by elitefx:

...money is no object. Bring it on Voltage.........

YAH!
We will crowd source legal strategy and legal filings!

So umm... I only know how to put a stamp on an envelope to say, "see you in court", I'll let others fill in the blanks...

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

1 recommendation

El Quintron

Premium Member

said by hm :

I only know how to put a stamp on an envelope to say, "see you in court", I'll let others fill in the blanks...

In most cases I'd argue that will suffice. The point of the letters is to get you to settle not to get you to fight.

"Legal Chicken" if you will...

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

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

Correct.
quote:
We will only accept letters properly certified by a court official and handed in person via an officer of the court

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

1 recommendation

Gone

Premium Member

said by TwiztedZero:

Correct.

quote:
We will only accept letters properly certified by a court official and handed in person via an officer of the court

That is why I simply said ignore them, because failing to do that they aren't anything more than an unsubstantiated threat.

That, or, provided they are sent using regular lettermail, you "never received any letter regarding this issue."

Their intention is to extort money through voluntary settlements, not take it to court. Their only next step after ignoring that letter is to file in court, something they don't want to do. Still, the suggestions about writing them back and telling them point-blank that you deny all liability and intend to pursue a vigorous defence should they file will achieve the same thing.

TOPDAWG
Premium Member
join:2005-04-27
Calgary, AB

TOPDAWG

Premium Member

did not RMCP not once say they would not go after pirates? this is not like the US where you can clog up the courts like crazy with BS and have the government spend well into the millions going after people.

What I want to know how can a US company can come into Canada and demand cdns info of any type unless it's a serious crime. Did the company demand the info themselves or hire a company in Canada to do it for them or use their cdn bunch if they got one to request the info?

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

The RCMP would only be involved in criminal copyright prosecution. What we're talking about here is civil infringement, something any rights holder can initiate on their own.

As for a company coming here and doing this? We have copyright law. They have just as much right to appear before a judge to plead their case as you, I or anyone else can under the law...

... now, whether the judge buys an argument it is an entirely different matter all together.

TOPDAWG
Premium Member
join:2005-04-27
Calgary, AB

TOPDAWG

Premium Member

I see them just taking a few cases to court to prove a point and try to install fear into people.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

1 recommendation

Gone

Premium Member

Let them. It'll come back to bite them in the ass. Hard.
funny0
join:2010-12-22

funny0 to hm

Member

to hm
said by hm :

said by elitefx:

...money is no object. Bring it on Voltage.........

YAH!
We will crowd source legal strategy and legal filings!

So umm... I only know how to put a stamp on an envelope to say, "see you in court", I'll let others fill in the blanks...

THINK SCO vs LINUX and how groklaw.net worked
very very interesting idea....
you might even get PJ to pick up on this and get some people going!!!!
funny0

funny0 to TOPDAWG

Member

to TOPDAWG
said by TOPDAWG:

did not RMCP not once say they would not go after pirates? this is not like the US where you can clog up the courts like crazy with BS and have the government spend well into the millions going after people.

What I want to know how can a US company can come into Canada and demand cdns info of any type unless it's a serious crime. Did the company demand the info themselves or hire a company in Canada to do it for them or use their cdn bunch if they got one to request the info?

the rcmp said that they would not go after non commerical file sharing....which cause there are millions of them you can see why ...interestign take is the charter of rights and freedoms says if a law is unenforceable then it should not become a law....

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by funny0:

the rcmp said that they would not go after non commerical file sharing....which cause there are millions of them you can see why ...interestign take is the charter of rights and freedoms says if a law is unenforceable then it should not become a law....

The RCMP only deal with criminal copyright infringement. A rights holder is still entitled to file a civil suit if they so desire.

hm
@videotron.ca

hm

Anon

said by Gone:

The RCMP only deal with criminal copyright infringement. A rights holder is still entitled to file a civil suit if they so desire.

hmm don't think so..

»www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/qc/no ··· -eng.htm
The RCMP takes action and investigates this type of crime if there are grounds to believe that material has been copied for the purpose of commercial distribution, or to such an extent as to be prejudicial to the copyright holder. Every person who copies or reproduces a video game for the purpose of commercial distribution or sale commits an offence under the Copyright Act.

The RCMP could go after these people, and they have in the past 2 years for what voltage is claiming in their court filing (ie. commercial distribution). But I can't see the RCMP even touching this one, the way it is, with a 10-foot pole since we all know there is no commercial distribution here.

More like a trick for people to say they only downloaded it for themselves and not for commercial distribution.

In regards to the games that were copied above by this french guy, most none of the title were available in Quebec due to them only being available in English. So again what financial harm is there when the product is banned from a prov and people can't even buy them. heh.

Different for these Ontario people charged though...

So one must wonder, if voltage is so adamant that these people committed commercial distribution, they could have involved the RCMP. But for some reason chose not to. And we all know the reason why.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by hm :

hmm don't think so..

You think wrong. The RCMP - or any police service for that matter - only deals with criminal matters. Your own reference that you used to try and dispute that only further proved you wrong by containing the word "crime."

Everything we're discussing here are civil remedies to copyright infringement, not criminal. The RCMP nor any other police service are involved in any way, shape or form on issues of civil infringement.

hm
@videotron.ca

hm

Anon

The copyright holders are "encouraged" to seek remedy via legal civil action, however "commercial distribution" of pirated goods can be reported to and handled by the RCMP.

Says so right on the RCMP website.

Mass "commercial distribution" and profiteering of pirated goods is indeed what voltage is charging here in their court filing.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by hm :

The copyright holders are "encouraged" to seek remedy via legal civil action, however "commercial distribution" of pirated goods can be reported to and handled by the RCMP.

Sure, you can call the RCMP, or even the OPP, SQ or your local police service. I never disputed that. Whether or not they do anything about, or whether the Crown proceeds in laying criminal charges, is a completely different story all together.

Everything we are discussing right now, however, is civil infringement. This is not a criminal case. The RCMP - nor any other police service - are not involved in civil cases. Even attempting to bring them up in this discussion or used words like "crime" is completely irrelevant to this discussion and, quite frankly, only makes you look foolish.

hm
@videotron.ca

hm

Anon

What I'm getting at is that what Voltage is charging in court does fit this, per the RCMP.

Thus the reason why they want to look at all your financial history (as stated in the claim). All your tax records, Bank accounts, all your banking history, what your house and car are worth, your salary etc to build a financial picture of you to see if you are living beyound your means (or to see what kind of money they can get from you, who knows). Just like the RCMP would do to you.

Would the RCMP touch this? No. Because the reality of it isn't what voltage is claiming, on a mass scale. Voltage is fishing.

Which leads to the next question...

Can someone make up things like this that they know aren't even true (if it were true RCMP would get involved).

Can they make this claim, claiming that all 2300 people are the same (this is called joinder), when in fact they aren't.

Or is voltage just trying to make stuff up to show why all 2300 should be joined and treated as one, even though we all know it isn't true?

Going back to Marc's points:
»Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.

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

They are claiming mass "commercial distribution and profiteering" of their movies.

Is this true? If it were, surely the RCMP and even Revenue Canada would be on these people licking-split.

Is the case of, "all 2300 people getting rich of their works", a bona-fide case so that Voltage will get their entire financial history (not just their names and addresses).

Is it even justified to lump all these people as one (joinder)?

Doesn't even seem realistic that all 2300 are "commercial distributors profiting"?

(e) the public interests in favour of disclosure must outweigh the legitimate privacy concerns.

Does public interest really favour the disclosure of peoples info and financial records for what is clearly not a case of mass "commercial distributing and profiteering"? Or is it more of a case of a fishing expedition?

Voltages court filing (as they state it) meets the criteria for the RCMP to be involved, and also that of Revenue Canada inspectors.

I mean if the RCMP or even Revenue Canada won't step in, does Voltage thus meet the criteria of points A & E?