I was once accused long long time ago, wasn't any fishing expedition like Voltage but i called their lawyers office right away and i had to fill out a lot of paperwork proving i was innocent. I was lucky back then, that the lawyers believed me and i was off the hook.

Look at it this way, if a court order were granted on Jan 14th, everyone is happy except the accused. Teksavvy is out of this and most likely will be praised that they did their best. The court is good too since they have granted enough time. Voltage is most happy since they can start sending those "paid up or else" letters.

This is a "win win" situation and I must say the lawyers from Voltage was right on, it was only a PR move by Teksavvy.

I must say the lawyers from Voltage was right on, it was only a PR move by Teksavvy.

Well this is all technical IMO, Teksavvy wanted a clean cut and do not want any of this to come back to haunt them (get them involved again) once they released the information.

If you have read the live update of the court proceedings that day, it was only proper for the judge to delay his decision till Jan 14th because it was a matter of fact that Teksavvy don't have enough time to inform all those who are involved plus making sure no mistakes.

Correct me if I am wrong, they are not giving a fight. It is only proper to give out any of their customers' information with a court order otherwise they'll be breaking the terms and conditions (the part on privacy) they we signed with them.

3) Teksavvy won't simply give out identifying information. They are forcing Voltage to drag them through court first, to get a court order. Even if you feel they aren't putting up enough of a fight, the fact is they are putting up at least some fight - even if it is minimal.

The MAIN issue is that TekSavvy is giving out identifying information without anyone having been convicted of a crime

Bottom line is this, if you don't do anything wrong on the internet, then you have nothing to fear. If you simply browse the internet or check email, then there is nothing to worry about.

How is this fair to consumers? We depend on our ISP's our anything, doesn't matter who, to challenge something if accused. Just because someone says "yup they did it, we have an IP" we're guilty and now it's up to us to prove otherwise? No way man.

I am confident I will be flamed for what will be perceived to be a contrary view, and I fully understand the privacy issues and agree that an IP is not a foolproof indicator, BUT, and I am a lawyer, if Voltage uses an IP to "identify" someone who did indeed download one of Voltage's movies and that person is asked under oath whether they downloaded the movie what do you think they will say? The court won't entertain excuses like my wifi is unencrypted or can be broken or..., the court will only care about the answer to the question, "Did you download the movie, yes or no?".

The sense I get from reading these posts is that people want the whole thing thrown out based on privacy or IP identifier issues. That may indeed happen and everyone will breathe a sigh of relief, but remember that there are copyright laws here in Canada and the court will enforce those laws if it determines that Voltage suffered harm.

I understand the concerns from everyone and I too am concerned. I am no longer a TSI customer but not because of their stance, but because I wanted faster internet and they don't have an agreement with Cogeco yet.

Bottom line is this, if you don't do anything wrong on the internet, then you have nothing to fear. If you simply browse the internet or check email, then there is nothing to worry about.

Bottom line is this, if you don't do anything wrong on the internet, then you have nothing to fear. If you simply browse the internet or check email, then there is nothing to worry about.

Bottom line is this, if you don't do anything wrong [...], then you have nothing to fear.

I'm so tempted to link a complete course on how to hack wifi available to ANYONE.

Given the relative complexity of setting up and given the very public knowledge of how to circumvent wifi security, is it reasonable for the courts to hold you liable? That among others would be my first line of defense on January 14th. At which point, I would put on a demonstration. Would the judge grant access to thousands of people who may be innocent?

As for the opinion of the thread originator....remember.....first they came for my neighbor and I said nothing.......

So those of us who are innocent need to do $omething with our $$ before they come for us.

Bottom line is this, if you don't do anything wrong on the internet, then you have nothing to fear. If you simply browse the internet or check email, then there is nothing to worry about.

Ok, then ppl should be asking whether or not Voltage has the right to ask for this info

Ok, then ppl should be asking whether or not Voltage has the right to ask for this info and not blaming TSI for their stance.

I understand the concerns from everyone and I too am concerned. I am no longer a TSI customer but not because of their stance, but because I wanted faster internet and they don't have an agreement with Cogeco yet.

However, the ppl that are complaining are too a degree coming across guilty for whatever reason(s). I will assume that they have been doing some questionable stuff online, whether that be downloading movies/music/tv shows/etc. Now this apparent lawsuit and TSI's stance on IP logging has them all concerned and scared because the gravy boat may be coming to an end.

Bottom line is this, if you don't do anything wrong on the internet, then you have nothing to fear. If you simply browse the internet or check email, then there is nothing to worry about.

Now if you are downloading stuff that you shouldn't be downloading, then guess what, you need to be a tad more careful. Either acquire a VPN to at least make it harder to track, or get a Usenet account to download your stuff and make sure that SSL encryption is enabled. Once you do one or both of those things, the odds of you getting a letter in the mail is slim to none.

For those that want TSI to stand up for the customer, why should they do that if you are doing something illegal to begin with? If TSI said "no" to the courts, how would that reflect on them? The courts would get pissed off, and cause a crap storm for TSI and for what.... to protect the consumer that's conducting questionable or illegal stuff off the net?

Give your heads a shake guys

TSI fought the Big 3 and the CRTC in the past, not the provincial/federal courts due to copyright infringement.