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.