| |
to TSI Marc
Re: Discussion about log retentionI'll be short, Mark: in the long run, the length of your log retention will be the inverse function of your customer retention. Something like this:
Cr = K / Lr
where Cr is customer retention, Lr - log retention and K is a constant.
If you implement the 6-month retention policy, you will have to hide this in small print, as none of the sane(*) potential customers will like this.
If you reduce it to 1 month or less, you could even advertise this as a selling point of the service, as you will be ahead of the competition.
So use your judgement.
- A TekSavvy subscriber
(*) In general, at least 95% of people are sane. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17 |
said by wingedhorsey:(*) In general, at least 95% of people are sane.
Then 'splain how Harper got elected. He'll will soon be bringing you the TPP - Trans-Pacific Partnership - which will *criminalize* just about all 'copyright infringement', including removal of fair use rights and no 'format shifting' even for disability use. He's also the same guy who wants DPI at every ISP. |
|
 TwiztedZeroNine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
1 edit |
said by MaynardKrebs:said by wingedhorsey:(*) In general, at least 95% of people are sane.
Then 'splain how Harper got elected. He'll will soon be bringing you the TPP - Trans-Pacific Partnership - which will *criminalize* just about all 'copyright infringement', including removal of fair use rights and no 'format shifting' even for disability use. He's also the same guy who wants DPI at every ISP. Time Remaining: 2 years, 9 months, 26 days, 22 hours, 45 minutes until we can attempt to get rid of Harper once and for all! Voters in Canada will go to the polls on Monday, October 19, 2015. Oh I can't wait for Election Day! The only problem is the TPP damage would be damn near irreversable by then. :( and thats not going to be a good thing. At this point I don't have any confidence in the Gov(s) involved with TPP of placing fair checks & balances on this secret partnership deal. |
|
| |
to wingedhorsey
said by wingedhorsey:If you implement the 6-month retention policy, you will have to hide this in small print, as none of the sane(*) potential customers will like this. If you're sampling from DSLR users then it may seem like the majority of people wouldn't like this, but in reality DSLR users are the minority and the real majority of users probably won't care. Personally, I couldn't care less. Teksavvy isn't keeping track of what I do, just with what IP address I do it with (feel free to chime in if this is incorrect). I'm fine with them keeping this for 90 years if they want. Sure, if I was one of the accused, and especially if I was one of the falsely accused, then I might feel different. But I have a hunch the truly falsely accused (those where the IP address didn't share copyrighted material at all) are few and far between so I'm not really worried about that happening to me. And I have little sympathy for the arguably falsely accused (those where the person whose name is on the bill didn't share the copyrighted material, so they're claiming/feigning ignorance of what their friends/family are doing with their internet connection, or those who were hacked and abused as a proxy), so I'm not too concerned about that either. So yeah, keep a history of my IP addresses for as long as you want Teksavvy (well technically I don't have a say since I'm not a customer anymore, but once you light up Brantford for cable I'll be back!) |
|
|
| |
"Personally, I couldn't care less. Teksavvy isn't keeping track of what I do, just with what IP address I do it with (feel free to chime in if this is incorrect). I'm fine with them keeping this for 90 years if they want."
In case you haven't been following this case, Teksavvy already admitted they notified 42 customers in error. This kind of error could get YOU sued for no valid reason. I guess you know legal costs are a bit higher than ISP service and in a civil case it's a crap shoot if you win or lose. The little guy will likely lose unless they can get a large team of lawyers and experts on their side. Still think you want to take a gamble on log retention? |
|
 Txbronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium Member
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON |
Tx
Premium Member
2012-Dec-23 10:33 am
said by swampboy:"Personally, I couldn't care less. Teksavvy isn't keeping track of what I do, just with what IP address I do it with (feel free to chime in if this is incorrect). I'm fine with them keeping this for 90 years if they want."
In case you haven't been following this case, Teksavvy already admitted they notified 42 customers in error. This kind of error could get YOU sued for no valid reason. I guess you know legal costs are a bit higher than ISP service and in a civil case it's a crap shoot if you win or lose. The little guy will likely lose unless they can get a large team of lawyers and experts on their side. Still think you want to take a gamble on log retention?
Seems many people should be also claiming ignorance because they are happy to say that yet not realize a mistake was already made. Yes it was caught, but the mistake happened and leaves the "What if" aspect if it wasn't caught. It's really easy to say it when it wasn't them mistakenly notified. Imagine if these same people did get notified and pleaded their innocence just like everyone in prison is innocent right? Happy fighting it in court. Enjoy the costs associated with it even if proven innocent and the time it takes to fight it. |
|
| Tx |
Tx to Ree
Premium Member
2012-Dec-23 10:36 am
to Ree
said by Ree:said by wingedhorsey:If you implement the 6-month retention policy, you will have to hide this in small print, as none of the sane(*) potential customers will like this. If you're sampling from DSLR users then it may seem like the majority of people wouldn't like this, but in reality DSLR users are the minority and the real majority of users probably won't care. Personally, I couldn't care less. Teksavvy isn't keeping track of what I do, just with what IP address I do it with (feel free to chime in if this is incorrect). I'm fine with them keeping this for 90 years if they want. Sure, if I was one of the accused, and especially if I was one of the falsely accused, then I might feel different. But I have a hunch the truly falsely accused (those where the IP address didn't share copyrighted material at all) are few and far between so I'm not really worried about that happening to me. And I have little sympathy for the arguably falsely accused (those where the person whose name is on the bill didn't share the copyrighted material, so they're claiming/feigning ignorance of what their friends/family are doing with their internet connection, or those who were hacked and abused as a proxy), so I'm not too concerned about that either. So yeah, keep a history of my IP addresses for as long as you want Teksavvy (well technically I don't have a say since I'm not a customer anymore, but once you light up Brantford for cable I'll be back!) Dig your head in the sand a little further. Are you lazy or just haven't seen half the discussions over the last week or ever read the news? People like you i'd laugh at if you were ever mistakenly notified and truly innocent. |
|
| |
d4m1r to Ree
Member
2012-Dec-23 11:57 am
to Ree
said by Ree: But I have a hunch the truly falsely accused (those where the IP address didn't share copyrighted material at all) are few and far between so I'm not really worried about that happening to me. Then you are totally misinformed about the issue and should have read up on what has already happened and the technology involved in collecting IP data before commenting.... |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17 |
to swampboy
said by swampboy:In case you haven't been following this case, Teksavvy already admitted they notified 42 customers in error. This kind of error could get YOU sued for no valid reason. I guess you know legal costs are a bit higher than ISP service and in a civil case it's a crap shoot if you win or lose. The little guy will likely lose unless they can get a large team of lawyers and experts on their side. Still think you want to take a gamble on log retention?
Teksavvy already admitted they notified 42 customers in error. This kind of error could get YOU sued for no valid reason. And in this instance TSI is checking and re-checking everything they do.This is *EXACTLY* the reason TSI (an indeed all ISP's) should not be hanging onto logs for more than the barest minimum amount of time. Just imagine what will happen when IP address trolling becomes routine - most ISP's will simply will slap things together with minimal effort and review and *numerous* false positives will creep into the results reported to the trolls - with hundred/thousands of lives potentially financially crippled. Just imagine how riled up people will get with their ISP's and MP's when falsely accused and forced to pay $20k .... and their son/daughter can't afford to go to university as a result. Gotta wonder if the 39.62%* of the people who voted in the last election for Harper (or just 24.2% of eligible voters*) really wants this to happen. * Source: Elections.ca |
|
| |
Ree
Member
2012-Dec-23 9:24 pm
said by MaynardKrebs:Just imagine how riled up people will get with their ISP's and MP's when falsely accused and forced to pay $20k .... and their son/daughter can't afford to go to university as a result. This is assuming they get the $20k they want. As others have said it's quite likely that ignoring their extortion attempt will be the end of it. In the off-chance that it goes to court, it's also quite likely that people will find themselves paying something close to the minimum of $100 instead of the maximum of $5k (or the $20k they're quoting). And if people do go to court and wind up owing peanuts, that should be the end of all this foolishness since it won't be profitable for them anymore. So I agree people will be riled up if they're forced to pay $20k (whether they're falsely accused or not), but I'd bet against that ever happening. |
|
|
| |
said by Ree:
As others have said it's quite likely that ignoring their extortion attempt will be the end of it. In the off-chance that it goes to court, it's also quite likely that people will find themselves paying something close to the minimum of $100 instead of the maximum of $5k (or the $20k they're quoting).
No and no. If they sue you, one of these scenarios will likely play out: a) you don't file a defense, they get default judgment for the $20K. A writ of execution can then be issued directing the Sheriff at the county where you live to seize and sell your property to enforce the judgment. They might also attempt to garnish your wages. b) you grab the first lawyer you can get and file a defense. Unfortunately you only manage to refute the commercial infringement part of Voltage's claims. The judge finds against you in the amount of $500 for non-commercial infringement. You still have to pay your lawyer about $3,500 so you are on the hook for $4,000. c) you get an experienced IP lawyer and mount a simple but effective defense. After a couple of court appearances the judge dismisses Voltage's claim against you. Your legal bills: $7,000. d) you mount a very effective defense but are countered by Voltage's lawyers. A good deal of expert testimony is demanded. The case drags through the courts for months. Regardless of who prevails, your legal bills are now in the tens of thousands. In none of these scenarios do you walk away paying $100. It's just not going to happen, because showing up to court will immediately put you in the hole $3,000, and it would be very, very unlikely for the judge to award you costs, unless Voltage's lawyers are complete idiots and bungle this horribly. |
|
| |
to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:said by wingedhorsey:(*) In general, at least 95% of people are sane.
Then 'splain how Harper got elected. He'll will soon be bringing you the TPP - Trans-Pacific Partnership - which will *criminalize* just about all 'copyright infringement', including removal of fair use rights and no 'format shifting' even for disability use. He's also the same guy who wants DPI at every ISP. Let me guess... Perhaps, the alternatives were even more insane ? Sometimes, the only choice is to pick a subjectively lesser evil in an attempt to avoid something which would be even worse. But I certainly disagree with Harper on this issue. |
|
| |
I don't think anybody should be lobbying for zero retention logs. 2-4 weeks would be fair to meet the needs of law enforcement and would even give a chance to rights holders to defend their position, while minimizing larger fishing expeditions.
I suspect Voltage are pushing this case so as to either extinguish torrenting as a means of sharing/distributing content or turning it into a cash cow to them via lawsuits. Right now those willing to do so can funnel their traffic, including torrenting, via an anonymous VPN. It is anonymous because it keeps no logs, so the troll hits a dead end, regardless of how much it monitors.
If you push for zero retention of logs for ISP's, there'll be a justified outcry from law enforcement and others, who will join their voices to that of copyright trolls. You'll then see mandatory retention for logs, anonymous VPN's based in Canada would have to shut down or move out of the country, etc, etc.
We should strive to keep things fair to all parties involved, it's the Canadian way. Or was. |
|
TwiztedZeroNine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON |
said by Fuzzy285:I suspect Voltage are pushing this case so as to either extinguish torrenting as a means of sharing/distributing content or turning it into a cash cow to them via lawsuits.
If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof. |
|
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON |
34764170 (banned)
Member
2012-Dec-25 5:47 pm
said by TwiztedZero:If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof.
Completely retarded. So then screwdriver manufactures should be sued because they can be used to kill people. |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium Member
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON |
Tx
Premium Member
2012-Dec-25 5:59 pm
said by 34764170:said by TwiztedZero:If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof.
Completely retarded. So then screwdriver manufactures should be sued because they can be used to kill people. lol i was going to comment on his earlier and i said forget it... bit torrent wasn't created to facilitate piracy but so many people like to read in to the propaganda and believe everything they read. Thought it was funny because first thing that came to mind was guns :/ Of which is a perfect example. |
|
 apvm
join:2003-02-14
London, ON |
apvm
Member
2012-Dec-27 1:11 am
I am with Tx all the way since he seems to be knowledgeable and knows what he is talking. |
|
| |
to Fuzzy285
said by Fuzzy285:said by Ree:
As others have said it's quite likely that ignoring their extortion attempt will be the end of it. In the off-chance that it goes to court, it's also quite likely that people will find themselves paying something close to the minimum of $100 instead of the maximum of $5k (or the $20k they're quoting).
No and no. If they sue you, one of these scenarios will likely play out: a) you don't file a defense, they get default judgment for the $20K. A writ of execution can then be issued directing the Sheriff at the county where you live to seize and sell your property to enforce the judgment. They might also attempt to garnish your wages. b) you grab the first lawyer you can get and file a defense. Unfortunately you only manage to refute the commercial infringement part of Voltage's claims. The judge finds against you in the amount of $500 for non-commercial infringement. You still have to pay your lawyer about $3,500 so you are on the hook for $4,000. c) you get an experienced IP lawyer and mount a simple but effective defense. After a couple of court appearances the judge dismisses Voltage's claim against you. Your legal bills: $7,000. d) you mount a very effective defense but are countered by Voltage's lawyers. A good deal of expert testimony is demanded. The case drags through the courts for months. Regardless of who prevails, your legal bills are now in the tens of thousands. In none of these scenarios do you walk away paying $100. It's just not going to happen, because showing up to court will immediately put you in the hole $3,000, and it would be very, very unlikely for the judge to award you costs, unless Voltage's lawyers are complete idiots and bungle this horribly. A) disabled people have an undue harm clause that protects them form more then 49$ a month in any claim welfare its like 29$ B) voltage's claim is for commercial infringement if you prove or they cant prove commercial infringement the case should be dropped , refile for the appropriate law and set of laws thank you. C) you also file a counter claim for your fees and pain and suffering that you were not commercially infringing there UNintellectual property. YOU could also add slander and defamation of character as they are classifying and stating publically that these people are pirates, all definitions in books on pirates state they are armed robbers whom harm physically people for loot....of which none of this you will claim you have done....small claims court 120$ lawyer for it 3 grand max settlement 25000 dollars. D)voltage doesnt want a case that drags on months , evidenced already by them wanting money to cover there current legal fees ROFL ...SEE part C) of my rebuttal. THe whole aim is like a criminal doing a drive by a store smashing the window and grabbing all they can and riding off to do so again.... IN every scenario you should win cause its not commercial infringement they have to prove you profited which you did not. show me again how any ip address on the net right now you can tell if its making money for the user or not....YOU CANT BUT if i catch you at a flea market selling voltage stuff you gte this kind of case for commercial infringement. have a nice day and learn what the difference between commercial and non commercial FILE SHARING is.NOTE also of significance is fact that voltage has yet to redraft the notice that TSI is supposed ot send to these affected ips. THEY seem not to care or there legal team is a joke. THEY cant even use the right part of the law in filing. |
|
| funny0 |
to Tx
said by Tx:said by 34764170:said by TwiztedZero:If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof.
Completely retarded. So then screwdriver manufactures should be sued because they can be used to kill people. lol i was going to comment on his earlier and i said forget it... bit torrent wasn't created to facilitate piracy but so many people like to read in to the propaganda and believe everything they read. Thought it was funny because first thing that came to mind was guns :/ Of which is a perfect example. not to mention bit torrent inc is owned by warner brothers , they could just sue themselves |
|
