dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
8239
share rss forum feed

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to resa1983

Re: Teksavvy Voltage motion - Looking for some advice

said by resa1983:

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.

no class action lawsuit like htis has been done in canada, and like i said they dont have any changes that state all the people being sued cant have charges fully read in court and that takes a tona time with 2300 people. NOT to mention should a person whom didnt download file (a) be in a lawsuit with a person whom downloaded a differant file and only file (b) while you have persons 3-4 that did only file (c) and file (d)
and person 5 that did them all.
seems to me like differant cases to be heard ....

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to qewey
said by qewey:

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.

they arent filing for NON COMMERICIAL INFRINGMENT
they want commerical punitive damages of 10000 per file per instance of the file.

NOT non commerical 100-5000 for all your infringments as this clearly is and they ought to get punished as you cant plead ignorance of the law....and this is what and why TSI should have pounced on in my opinion.

funny0

join:2010-12-22
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).

and all three own and produce movies and tv...gee wonder why, cause then they can come after you easier for there stuff.
thats why its bias to have an isp with iptv or owning cable or satallite tv/movies.

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to resa1983
so far no one is fighting back really if cippic doesn't get intervene status its being handed to voltage.

enjoy

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to Bugblndr
said by Bugblndr:

said by qewey See Profile
Yes and there is no law on logs retention time ..... so TSI can keep no logs if they wanted too going forward (or 1-3 day logging).

That would be a BIG sign that they care about their customers privacy.

That would be a BIG sign to all those into child porn that they are the ISP for them. TSI wisely doesn't want that reputation.

no it would not
rcmp and csis monitor for that and if they see a canuck ip at a place they will get the proper warrant and then your in biggie trouble

the law regarding that as currently sits is no matter where a Canadian is or what site anywhere on earth he visits OUR laws are there and in place to prosecute.

PRE CRIME is not crime either you cant accuse me or anyone of something we haven't nor will do to justify rights taking.


Jeffer71

join:2008-09-13
Carrying Place, ON
Reviews:
·Acanac
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.

I don't put faith in anyone but myself when it comes to protecting my privacy online.

Anyone that expects it from their ISP is delusional and ignorant.

Take the bull by the horn and protect yourselves.

It's not like the internet and online security issues are virgin territory, this shit has been going on for years.

Grappler

join:2002-09-01
Ottawa, ON
reply to Dr Facts
said by Dr Facts :

The worst thing you can do is ignore it, do not do this. Voltage wants you to so they can go to court and get a judgment against you no fuss or muss. They can then sell the judgment to a collection agency and then you're life will become that much harder. They won't care about right or wrong, they have a legal document that say you owe them money, the end.

They cannot get a judgement without the service of a court order to appear (read - summons), for the opportunity to appear in court. We are talking about a "letter of intent" this is not a court order to appear. No judgement can be rendered against a person without having given them an opportunity to appear in court.


dillyhammer
START me up
Premium
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

I'm curious as to who you think will do better than Teksavvy in protecting your privacy

If people stand around and do nothing, how the hell are ISPs going to get the message the handing off our private information is a bad thing?

What people need to do is make this experience as painful as possible, so that any ISP considering giving up the info at the drop of a hat thinks twice.

Let's face it. This was a risk assessment exercise by TSI. They simply weighed the possible outcomes of fighting versus rolling over, and decided that rolling over was less risk.

We as a community need to change that perception.

The message we need to send is, "if you roll over, it will cost you, and big time".

There needs to be a backlash for rolling over like this. It needs to be swift, and extremely painful. Once it goes public that TSI released the info I think we're going to see some of that.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Cogeco UBB, No Modem Required - »[Niagara] 40gb of "usage" while the modem is unplugged


dontbackdown

@nltelcom.com
What we are witnessing is the death of an ISP. Inside of 5 years Teksavvy will be gone if they roll over. The whole business model was about protecting the customer and they will have effectively thrown it out the window. If they fight the business will grow, if they don't it will die. Everybody stuck with Teksavvy through thick and thin because of this.

bullwinkle

join:2011-03-19
Nepean, ON
said by dontbackdown :

The whole business model was about protecting the customer and they will have effectively thrown it out the window. If they fight the business will grow, if they don't it will die. Everybody stuck with Teksavvy through thick and thin because of this.

I have to disagree with you. As far as I can tell, it's more that their business model was about providing better - or at least, differentiated - value to customers. Their prior battles with the incumbents and the regulators were about sustaining their ability to provide their current and potential consumers as an aggregate with those other choices. That's very different from your expectation that they should defend individual customers who may have been implicated in court proceedings.

If your choice of ISP does depend on having that expectation met, then, yeah, you should look elsewhere for service.


hm

@videotron.ca
said by bullwinkle:

said by dontbackdown :

The whole business model was about protecting the customer and they will have effectively thrown it out the window. If they fight the business will grow, if they don't it will die. Everybody stuck with Teksavvy through thick and thin because of this.

I have to disagree with you.

Some lawyers are saying the same thing as "dontbackdown". Howard Knopff i one of them. See, »www.excesscopyright.blogspot.ca/···-in.html
... Will feisty, progressive Teksavvy, the ISP that has built its reputation on being customer-friendly, actually stand up and fight for its customers’ “privacy” without taking sides on “piracy”

Fight or flight.

If teksavvy just lets cippic handle it w/o involving themselves, they are going to lose face with a lot of people.

However my prediction is:
Teksavvy is loading the dice. That is, they are siding with and trying to let cippic handle it and if they fail to get intervention status then TSI will come out swinging. They are just leaving doors open. Or so I am hoping.

cynic10

join:2011-02-05
quote:
However my prediction is:Teksavvy is loading the dice. That is, they are siding with and trying to let cippic handle it and if they fail to get intervention status then TSI will come out swinging.[i/] They are just leaving doors open. Or so I am hoping.

I truly hope you're right about this last part but I don't have much faith. Already looking for new ISP in my area, Start.ca seems to be the next to go to.

And this is what happens when you give copyright trolls an inch....another one bites the dust.

»torrentfreak.com/music-biz-wants···-130105/
What started out with Eircom agreeing to have The Pirate Bay blocked could now potentially lead to a few other Irish ISPs having to follow suit.


dontbackdown

@start.ca
reply to bullwinkle
They should defend all customer not individual ones. Last I checked this was not the problem of one individual but that of thousands. Do you even have any idea what you are defending? Lol

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to hm
said by hm :

However my prediction is:
Teksavvy is loading the dice. That is, they are siding with and trying to let cippic handle it and if they fail to get intervention status then TSI will come out swinging. They are just leaving doors open. Or so I am hoping.

I'm really hoping this is the case as well, especially since TSI has serious business concerns here. From poaching by other ISPs (I'm sure P2P users are cash cows for the likes of Bhell and Robbers), detriment to their short term reputation which will affect referrals and retention rates, and long term reputation as this will be the case everyone remembers. People won't remember the 20-30 person suits but they will remember the first mass lawsuit that set the standard of behaviour for other ISPs to follow.

JohnDoe187

join:2013-01-04
Does anyone know if CIPPIC has been given intervener status or when that would be given or denied?

Tong

join:2012-12-11
r3t 38x
We will find out on Jan 14th. Right now, they don't.

shepd

join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
reply to bullwinkle
said by bullwinkle:

Apparently, representing yourself can be a gamble, even for lawyers. There was an article about this in the Citizen a few days ago:

»www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Self+···ory.html

That article is true to my experience. In my case, I spent more time informing the Judge about section 800 of the criminal code than I did speaking about the case. In the end the judge wasn't particularly convinced until the prosecution read him that section right out of the book and reminded him that I'm right. As which point he played the game of asking me to step behind the bar. I asked the person I was helping to do so as well as the court was showing prejudice against him without my support. The games ended at that point and the judge decided he'd rather not waste time and get it over with and let me be his agent. Halfway through the case a new prosecutor took over who I had to explain that section of the criminal code too. She wanted to speak with him in private. No way hosay. It takes nerves of steel to deal with what the government in this country will throw up against anyone who doesn't want a lawyer to help them.

That being said, I enjoys me some anti-authority moments, I'd do it again in a heartbeat. But if you aren't willing to stand up there and literally tell the judge they are wrong and you know more than them, you won't get anywhere. And it's a rather weird feeling when you do that and win. More than once. Kind of reminds you of the fact that Judges never do have to be lawyers, nor have any law experience, to head up that position.

abcjak

join:2012-12-18
reply to funny0

said by funny0 See Profile
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..

:

Hmmm.....all this talk of remaining "neutral" finally clicked button in my memory. How many of you were online roughly 15-20yrs ago? My recall is sketchy in the details but it concerned newsfeeds and NNTP and local storage of all kinds of things which normally would be illegal. If i remember right, in the end, it was decided that it was not the ISP/school/news-server-owners job to analyze and police everything that was going on with them and that they can turn a blind eye and remain neutral to what's going on with them. ...this was here, I was in univeristy at the time but the decision later trickled to Rogers and all the others. This sounds very similar to the position taken by the australian ISP that recently walked away from that movie company saying it's not their job to watch users the way the company wanted them to.



AkFubar
Admittedly, A Teksavvy Fan

join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN.
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to John Doe 187
On the other hand companies like Napster (P2P) were brought down for copyright infringement in the early days of P2P.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napster
--
If my online experience is enhanced, why are my speeds throttled?? BHell... A Public Futility.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
said by AkFubar:

On the other hand companies like Napster (P2P) were brought down for copyright infringement in the early days of P2P.

And Google could be raided and shut down today in the same way Megaupload was, and for the same reasons - facilitation. But Google ain't going to get raided and shutdown cuz they're an Amurrican company big enough to cause lots of people lots of pain.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to dillyhammer
said by dillyhammer:

If people stand around and do nothing, how the hell are ISPs going to get the message the handing off our private information is a bad thing?

What people need to do is make this experience as painful as possible, so that any ISP considering giving up the info at the drop of a hat thinks twice.

If the ISP gets served a court order, they have to comply or get charged with contempt for the court which could have some rather nasty consequence for the company... imagine a search warrant where the police brings down the routers and servers for investigation because the ISP refuses to cooperate. If the search discovers evidence that the ISP deleted records after they were made aware of the search warrant, the ISP and its employees may also get charged with destruction of evidence.

So, unless the ISP's owners and employees are willing to get criminally charged and/or have their business shut down for an undetermined period of time while their offices and installations are being stormed by investigators, there isn't much they can legally do to object to court orders once they have been issued.


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Wellington N
reply to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

And Google could be raided and shut down today in the same way Megaupload was, and for the same reasons - facilitation. But Google ain't going to get raided and shutdown cuz they're an Amurrican company big enough to cause lots of people lots of pain.

A search engine might be a tough fight on facilitation.

However, YouTube? When was the last time you were looking for a song on there and couldn't find it?
Expand your moderator at work

abcjak

join:2012-12-18
reply to A Lurker

Re: Teksavvy Voltage motion - Looking for some advice

said by A Lurker:

said by MaynardKrebs:

And Google could be raided and shut down today in the same way Megaupload was, and for the same reasons - facilitation. But Google ain't going to get raided and shutdown cuz they're an Amurrican company big enough to cause lots of people lots of pain.

A search engine might be a tough fight on facilitation.

However, YouTube? When was the last time you were looking for a song on there and couldn't find it?

the caching on google would fall under the same concept as the NNTP decision. tons of porn, copyrighted material and illegal stuff is stored on their servers just like it is on a long retention NNTP server on a big newsfeed.


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Wellington N
said by abcjak:

the caching on google would fall under the same concept as the NNTP decision. tons of porn, copyrighted material and illegal stuff is stored on their servers just like it is on a long retention NNTP server on a big newsfeed.

I didn't think about caching. I admit I never use Google.


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Reviews:
·VMedia
said by A Lurker:

said by abcjak:

the caching on google would fall under the same concept as the NNTP decision. tons of porn, copyrighted material and illegal stuff is stored on their servers just like it is on a long retention NNTP server on a big newsfeed.

I didn't think about caching. I admit I never use Google.

Bing? Yahoo? They're all the same.
--
No, I didn't. Honest... I ran out of gas. I... I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake.......