dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
8193
share rss forum feed


TSI Jonathan
Premium
join:2011-08-24
canada
kudos:10
reply to wiggum

Re: Teksavvy Voltage motion - Looking for some advice

Edit: wrong thread


jamesvca

join:2012-12-13
Fruitvale, BC
reply to John Doe 187

How to fight Copyright Trolls

Speculative Invoicing Handbook, Download PDF

»www.dropbox.com/s/bc8nr49vq0ukf9···olls.pdf


bullwinkle

join:2011-03-19
Nepean, ON
reply to wiggum

said by wiggum:

I believe they may be looking for people to give them standing to oppose Voltage at the hearing on the 14th, and may be willing to help you out over the long term too.

Possibly, but I think it's more likely that they would want to maintain the public interest neutrality that they've asserted in their motion papers, and avoid a direct advocacy role on behalf of one or more individuals identified.


Brandon411

@198.96.127.x

The stance taken by Teksavvy *in my opinion* is a coward's one. This has nothing to do with being guilty or innocent at this stage and everything to do with privacy. How can some company with a history of extortion tactics be granted information base only solely gathered IP? This is the most ridiculous notion I have heard and Companies like Teksavvy should be fighting this instead of taking a neutral side... This case could possibly set a precedence which could open a new can of worms for Canada! So in my opinion Teksavvy taking a neutral stance goes everything they claim to stand for.

Does anyone actually think it's the responsibility of the accused to show up with a lawyer to oppose this initial motion?? That's the most ridiculous thing I have heard yet. This is the JOB of the ISP!


MFido

join:2012-10-19
kudos:2

Luckily it is your opinion ... which doesn't matter ...



bc_jk

@amd.co.at

When they come for your bank account don't act surprised. After all you might be infringing copyrights too, you simply didn't prove it in court... yet.



Dr Facts

@gc.ca
reply to Brandon411

said by Brandon411 :

This is the JOB of the ISP!

No, their job is to provide Internet Service and obey the law.

From what I can tell they've been doing just that.

They also gave their users a head's up which was a great service.

bullwinkle

join:2011-03-19
Nepean, ON
reply to Brandon411

said by Brandon411 :

Does anyone actually think it's the responsibility of the accused to show up with a lawyer to oppose this initial motion??

Note - I am not a lawyer, so take this with a non-lawyerly grain of salt.

If the accused wants to be 100% assured that the privacy issues are raised in court in reference to the motion for disclosure, then, yes, that individual should make sure that he/she has appropriate legal representation at the hearing, who can oppose the motion on some or all of the grounds that have already been raised here and elsewhere. An ISP may choose to oppose on the same grounds - or not - depending on the legal advice they receive. Third parties such as CIPPIC may seek to intervene in order to raise the same issues, but their participation is not an entitlement, and they might not be allowed to participate.

The subject of such a disclosure motion, however, is absolutely entitled to be represented, so again, the only way for the subject of a disclosure motion to guarantee that someone will be able to argue about the privacy implications would be to arrange specific representation themselves.

said by Brandon411 :

This is the JOB of the ISP!

Well, no. The job of the ISP is to fulfill the terms of the contracts they have with their customers. They are not obligated to advocate on your behalf in court. Whether they choose to do so in specific circumstances will be based on the legal advice that they receive with respect to risks, probabilities, potential liabilities, and their own best interests as a corporate entity.

Let's remember, too, that TekSavvy did not simply hand over information to Voltage. They requested that the court postpone the motion hearing to allow enough time to notify those affected - which in turn has allowed CIPPIC to step forward, and given those affected the chance to prepare as they see fit. I don't think that TekSavvy is getting enough credit for that good act.

bullwinkle

join:2011-03-19
Nepean, ON
reply to Rastan

said by Rastan:

The first thing you should do is read the speculative invoicing handbook.
»www.scribd.com/doc/115443516/The···-Edition

That's a great read - thanks for the link. My only caveat would be that this is written from the British perspective, and (I think) there's a bit more history there with these issues than we've seen in Canada. I suspect that ISPs and their law firms here may be a little more risk-averse until we've seen the waters tested a few times.
Expand your moderator at work


Steve99

@198.96.127.x
reply to Dr Facts

Re: Teksavvy Voltage motion - Looking for some advice

From what I can tell of the new bill or heard they are requried to give notice to those individuals accused. So they are basically doing the minimum?



Brandon411

@198.96.127.x
reply to bullwinkle

@Bullwinkle

Teksavvy is basically handing over the information as they said they will not be opposing the motion. The only reason they showed up to court was to ask for a delay since they screwed up the notifications. So in short that is the min. they should be doing. Is this not the case? Could be mistaken but not sure how some people is lead to believe Teksavvy is doing everyone such a BIG favor and is some hero but last I checked in the Bill they are required to give notice.

@Dr Facts

I understand that. But understand Teksavvy is looking out for number one... themselves... and hence why they did not oppose the motion. Does anyone actually believe what Teksavvy is doing is correct by not opposing? I'm pretty sure the majority of the public would disagree but like I said hey... you gotta look out for #1. Good job taking care of your customers TSI by doing the min. I'm sure they will grant you the same courtesy when it comes to ISP loyalty.



John Doe 187

@5.135.78.x
reply to John Doe 187

Thanks for the suggestions guys. I hope doing this through court won't cost me that much or put me in more financial problems.

Take care.



John Doe 187

@5.135.78.x
reply to wiggum

I think my decision will be to wait for the outcome of the case Jan 14th. If I get news that my info is being handed over I will contact a lawyer ASAP that day. Do you think this is the best approach? I am not sure if contacting them at this point is best and might cost me some cash$$$?



TraderOne

@teksavvy.com
reply to bullwinkle

said by [bquote=Brandon411 :

Let's remember, too, that TekSavvy did not simply hand over information to Voltage. They requested that the court postpone the motion hearing to allow enough time to notify those affected - which in turn has allowed CIPPIC to step forward, and given those affected the chance to prepare as they see fit. I don't think that TekSavvy is getting enough credit for that good act.

I would like to ask what the difference between 1 and 2 is?

1. I will notify you, then hand over your information to a jerk

2. I will hand over your information to a jerk

Frankly, I don't see a difference. At the end, Teksavvy will happily hand over your private information to a third party and doesn't give a sh*t about what that will put its customers into.

Here comes two questions.

1. Why does Teksavvy gather my private information and keep it for 90 days without any good reasons?

2. Why does Teksavvy refuse to take action in court to fulfill his obligation of protecting customer's privacy? Don't tell me notifying its customers by saying "I will give you up" and roll over is a good act of protecting customers' privacy.


Newuser1

@67.230.160.x
reply to bullwinkle

It's scary to think that someone like Voltage can demand my personal information base on IPs I hope someone stands up to them.


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

1 recommendation

reply to TraderOne

said by TraderOne :

said by [bquote=Brandon411 :

Let's remember, too, that TekSavvy did not simply hand over information to Voltage. They requested that the court postpone the motion hearing to allow enough time to notify those affected - which in turn has allowed CIPPIC to step forward, and given those affected the chance to prepare as they see fit. I don't think that TekSavvy is getting enough credit for that good act.

I would like to ask what the difference between 1 and 2 is?

1. I will notify you, then hand over your information to a jerk

2. I will hand over your information to a jerk

Frankly, I don't see a difference. At the end, Teksavvy will happily hand over your private information to a third party and doesn't give a sh*t about what that will put its customers into.

Here comes two questions.

1. Why does Teksavvy gather my private information and keep it for 90 days without any good reasons?

2. Why does Teksavvy refuse to take action in court to fulfill his obligation of protecting customer's privacy? Don't tell me notifying its customers by saying "I will give you up" and roll over is a good act of protecting customers' privacy.

The difference is that with 1, you have the option of getting yourself a lawyer first to fight the court order that would reveal your information. With the 2nd, I don't believe you get time to find a lawyer and fight the court order before your information has to be legally handed over under penalty from the courts.

1.
The 'private' information that Voltage wants, is essentially, your billing information (minus your actual credit card numbers, etc) which TSI needs to keep on file as long as you're a customer.. They need to know name, address, phone numbers, etc. ie, Contact info & address of service.

I think the only thing they keep 90 days, is the IP address history. I'm sorry, unlike some others, I do believe child porn investigations are a good reason to keep IP history for 90 days. That kind of scum deserve to be locked in a hole.

But the 90 days is also for billing discrepancies to be dealt with, as well as dealing with those DMC charges Bell doesn't bother charging TSI immediately for, and sometimes bills DMC charges for no actual rollout. Those need to be fought, and they need to have supporting info.

2.
The thing is, that Teksavvy didn't have to inform customers about the court order until AFTER it was already issued. They also didn't have to fight the court order - a few other ISPs in November didn't.

TSI fought for extension of the court order in order to inform their customers, and buy people time to get lawyers and make a decision as to what to do.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

Pharaoh11

join:2011-02-01
Toronto, ON
reply to John Doe 187

Don't worry too too much about this.
There already precedents dealing with these types of cases and its why no case of this type has been won.

'Your IP is like a phone number and though its under your name there no way to know for sure who on the other end.

You could be sharing the internet or friend could be online and so on.

Never cave into this type of scare tactic.


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

said by Pharaoh11:

Don't worry too too much about this.
There already precedents dealing with these types of cases and its why no case of this type has been won.

'Your IP is like a phone number and though its under your name there no way to know for sure who on the other end.

You could be sharing the internet or friend could be online and so on.

Never cave into this type of scare tactic.

The problem is that the precedents are all from 2004 (back when there were different laws), and from the US (which has different laws than us). Who knows what'll happen.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2

1 edit

said by resa1983:

The problem is that the precedents are all from 2004 (back when there were different laws), and from the US (which has different laws than us). Who knows what'll happen.

Precedents aren't considered null and void just because parliament changes the law. Precedents usually form the basis/reasoning for the creation of an updated version of said legislation.

Every time they update a Law doesn't mean they start over from scratch. ALL decisions to date regarding an issue are relevant UNLESS a judge's decision has been reversed on appeal.


John Doe 187

@5.135.78.x
reply to TraderOne

I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.


qewey

join:2007-10-04
reply to jamesvca

said by jamesvca:

How to fight Copyright Trolls

Speculative Invoicing Handbook, Download PDF

»www.dropbox.com/s/bc8nr49vq0ukf9···olls.pdf

Read this. It is pretty good.

It explains clearly why the number 1 priority is NOT PAY.

If they want your money, let them spend money and go through the courts. Especially when the minimum fine is 100$ and it costs them 1000$ per court appearance per IP + fees from TSI to find the info for them.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to John Doe 187

said by John Doe 187 :

I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.

Bell, Cogeco & Videotron didn't fight a court order from Voltage in Sept 2011 back when they could have easily argued privacy rights & evidence issues based on the 2004 decision.

Other TPIA providers decided not to fight November 2012. Before this 'neutral' requirement in the act which indemnifies them from liability from their customers' downloading. It wasn't in place til end of Nov I think? They wouldn't have been held liable for their customer's downloading practices no matter what.

As for now, they have to be 'neutral' whatever the hell that is, with no described standard for what 'neutral' is, and what ISPs can or can't do while remaining immune from liability.

Other ISPs have larger windows in which they keep IP address info..

I'm just curious who you plan on going with.. (No, I'm not being sarcastic.. I'm curious as to who you think will do better than Teksavvy in protecting your privacy).
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5

I think the trolls' idea of an isp is any open wifi router it can leech from. Cause as far as I know there isn't a single ISP in Canada that does what that troll wants.



TraderOne

@teksavvy.com
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

The difference is that with 1, you have the option of getting yourself a lawyer first to fight the court order that would reveal your information. With the 2nd, I don't believe you get time to find a lawyer and fight the court order before your information has to be legally handed over under penalty from the courts.

What I am saying is that notifying its customer or not makes no difference on Teksavvy's stance on protecting its customers' privacy. At the end, Teksavvy will happily hand over its customers' private information. Teksavvy does not give a sh*t about protecting its customers' privacy.

said by resa1983:

1.
The 'private' information that Voltage wants, is essentially, your billing information (minus your actual credit card numbers, etc) which TSI needs to keep on file as long as you're a customer.. They need to know name, address, phone numbers, etc. ie, Contact info & address of service.

I think the only thing they keep 90 days, is the IP address history. I'm sorry, unlike some others, I do believe child porn investigations are a good reason to keep IP history for 90 days. That kind of scum deserve to be locked in a hole.

But the 90 days is also for billing discrepancies to be dealt with, as well as dealing with those DMC charges Bell doesn't bother charging TSI immediately for, and sometimes bills DMC charges for no actual rollout. Those need to be fought, and they need to have supporting info.

I consider the linking between IP address and my personal identification as my private information. It tells where i go in the internet. That is what happens in the Voltage's troll. I don't mean I will do bad thing in the internet. It is just that I want to browse the web freely without being tracked by some unknown third party. So, Please don't tell me something like "if you do nothing wrong, you don't have to be scared". If you do believe "if you do nothing wrong, you don't have to be scared", I will take a camera and follow you all around and tell you " if you do nothing wrong, you don't have to be scared".

I don't think child porn investigation is a good reason to keep a 90 days log. A 2 days log can help child porn investigation as well. Child porn investigation is important. Protecting people's privacy is also important. I don't see how child porn investigation over rules privacy protection.

If Teksavvy has a business need to keep 90 days log. I have no problem with that as long as Teksavvy guards this log of private information as hard as it can. But, Notifying its customers by saying "We will hand over your private information. Sorry, you are on your own" is not a good way of showing how much Teksavvy values their customers' privacy. It just simply shows Teksavvy does not care about its customers' privacy at all.


bbchris2nd
Joke Factory

join:2010-09-03
Australia
reply to John Doe 187

I agree TSI is an ISP and they abide the law.

They won't save your ass same as other TPIA.

But I think something must be done to stop this troll.
--
Be brave even if you're not. Pretend to be. No one can tell the difference.



Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

said by John Doe 187 :

I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.

Bell, Cogeco & Videotron didn't fight a court order from Voltage in Sept 2011 back when they could have easily argued privacy rights & evidence issues based on the 2004 decision.

Other TPIA providers decided not to fight November 2012. Before this 'neutral' requirement in the act which indemnifies them from liability from their customers' downloading. It wasn't in place til end of Nov I think? They wouldn't have been held liable for their customer's downloading practices no matter what.

As for now, they have to be 'neutral' whatever the hell that is, with no described standard for what 'neutral' is, and what ISPs can or can't do while remaining immune from liability.

Other ISPs have larger windows in which they keep IP address info..

I'm just curious who you plan on going with.. (No, I'm not being sarcastic.. I'm curious as to who you think will do better than Teksavvy in protecting your privacy).

Comparing in that context is a far cry. Just because the big 3 do or don't do something doesn't mean it's ok for TSI to do or not to do something.

Isn't TSI different? I'm not even arguing about privacy or IP issues, just your argument. Quit comparing TSI to them. Everyone should quit comparing Teksavvy to anyone. They're not comparable, period.

If one user chooses to leave, doesn't mean we all should debate what one or the other did and didn't do. This is about Teksavvy. It really doesn't matter who they go with, it's not them Voltage is after right now, and Teksavvy may be Voltages go to ISP for for some time to come.


TraderOne

@teksavvy.com
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

2.
The thing is, that Teksavvy didn't have to inform customers about the court order until AFTER it was already issued. They also didn't have to fight the court order - a few other ISPs in November didn't.

TSI fought for extension of the court order in order to inform their customers, and buy people time to get lawyers and make a decision as to what to do.

I expect everybody to do their job and fulfill their own obligations. There are three parties involved in the Voltage't troll, Voltage, Teksavvy, Teksavvy's customers.

For Voltage, its job is to scare people to get its dirty money. Its obligation is to die miserably because it really creates a bad reputation for itself.

For Teksavvy's customers, their obligation is to browse the web wisely. Their job is to find legal assistance to protect themselves and not to expect somebody else to do it for themselves when sh*t litigation comes up .

For Teksavvy, its job is to provide its customer's with supreme internet service. Their obligation is to protect its customers privacy when sh*t litigation comes up.

Everyone needs to do their own work and fulfill their obligation. Customers will hire lawyers to fight in the court does not mean it is OK for Teksavvy to lay back and hand over its customers' private information without a fight ( Notifying its customers is not a fight).

Sure, Teksavvy does not need to inform customers about the court order before it is issued. Sure, a few ISPs in Canada just hand over their customers information without a blink of eyes. But, that does not mean Teksavvy is doing a good job by rolling over after informing its customers. A piece of sh*t stinks less in a pile of sh*t does not make it a diamond. It is still a piece of sh*t.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to Tx

said by Tx:

Comparing in that context is a far cry. Just because the big 3 do or don't do something doesn't mean it's ok for TSI to do or not to do something.

Isn't TSI different? I'm not even arguing about privacy or IP issues, just your argument. Quit comparing TSI to them. Everyone should quit comparing Teksavvy to anyone. They're not comparable, period.

If one user chooses to leave, doesn't mean we all should debate what one or the other did and didn't do. This is about Teksavvy. It really doesn't matter who they go with, it's not them Voltage is after right now, and Teksavvy may be Voltages go to ISP for for some time to come.

And what about my comparison of the TPIA providers who didn't fight back in Nov 2012?
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed

said by resa1983:

said by Tx:

Comparing in that context is a far cry. Just because the big 3 do or don't do something doesn't mean it's ok for TSI to do or not to do something.

Isn't TSI different? I'm not even arguing about privacy or IP issues, just your argument. Quit comparing TSI to them. Everyone should quit comparing Teksavvy to anyone. They're not comparable, period.

If one user chooses to leave, doesn't mean we all should debate what one or the other did and didn't do. This is about Teksavvy. It really doesn't matter who they go with, it's not them Voltage is after right now, and Teksavvy may be Voltages go to ISP for for some time to come.

And what about my comparison of the TPIA providers who didn't fight back in Nov 2012?

Same rules apply. Marc has time and time again said Teksavvy is not them. They pride themselves for being a different, better option.

Compare bell, rogers, telus all you like, they're in eachothers pockets... but TSI is a whole new ball game. They are absolutely different and moves they make every year will define them 10 years from now.