said by El Quintron:I may be wrong, but isn't this considered "gambling" with your customers information on the line? said by dillyhammer:
It appears as though Teksavvy and Voltage entered into some sort of an agreement whereby Teksavvy would refrain from contesting the motion if Voltage agreed to allow Teksavvy time to notify it's customers affected by the disclosure.
I'm obviously not Teksavvy here, so I can't really speak for them but I think the idea was to let CIPPIC fight it rather than put the ISP business at risk.
You could make the argument that by involving Teksavvy directly, they were giving Voltage an easy target (one large ISP to persue for all their "losses" concurrently) versus cooperating on the ISP level, and then letting the legal system and cippic take this on.