AkFubarAdmittedly, A Teksavvy Fan join:2005-02-28 Toronto CAN. |
to hm
Re: Voltage Versus Teksavvy, Round 2 Continuedsaid by hm :It should also be noted, since Teksavvy submitted their costs *to date*, American lobby groups are now attacking Canada for their statutory damages being to low (5,000$).
»www.michaelgeist.ca/cont ··· 784/125/
Coincidence? I think not. That goes to show it is not about protecting copyrights but all about the money. It should be noted that they have not been very successful recently in recovering the big $ they seek in US courts either. |
|
hm @videotron.ca |
hm
Anon
2013-Feb-14 1:13 pm
An Aussie economist put out a paper a couple of years ago showing that it's only a money funnel system to the USA. |
|
hm |
hm
Anon
2013-Feb-15 9:47 am
So What's going to happen now?
Does CIPPIC have to draft and submit what it plans to examine?
Or do they wait for a judge to pick it up and it hit court right away?
What is to happen now? When?
Any other info besides this latest news? |
|
hm |
to TSI Marc
Marc, During the last court hearing your lawyer brought up the fact that (I'm paraphrasing), Voltage dropped their lawsuits in Quebec against people, stating they only intended to send the extortion letters. Voltages lawyer turned around and claimed they did not and wanted to know where he heard that. Your lawyer stated it was in the press. Voltages lawyer never replied on the subject again at the hearing. So my Question: Do you, or your lawyers, or CIPPIC know the status of the Quebec lawsuits? Was it indeed dropped? I seem to recall this as well. Pretty sure it would have been in this topic with a link, if it were true (the one where I found one of the IP's belong to the Montreal Canadians): » Hurt Locker P2P Lawsuit Comes to Canada, but, a quick look shows nothing, unless I missed it in that books of comments. Any info on that one? Or any ref to the press release and/or media story your lawyer referred to? |
|
resa1983 Premium Member join:2008-03-10 North York, ON |
resa1983
Premium Member
2013-Feb-15 1:55 pm
This is about the confirmation of the settlements: » www.huffingtonpost.ca/20 ··· 810.htmlSomeone from Voltage or the lawyer's office blabbed to Huffington Post. As for Voltage's Quebec lawsuit, here's the docket, translated to English: » translate.google.com/tra ··· -1373-11These are the main points though: Aug 24, 2011: Filed Aug 29, 2011: First hearing - court granted order for subscriber info release Oct 4, 2011: Order from the court to file a schedule for the upcoming lawsuit, in by Nov 4, 2011 Nov 4, 2011: Plaintiff files schedule as ordered. Nov 18, 2011: Court orders plaintiff stick to their own schedule, and name defendants, and give progress report on Dec 16, 2011 Dec 16, 2011: Plaintiff asks for more time Dec 28, 2011: Court grants more time - has til Mar 2, 2012 Mar 5, 2012: Plaintiff tells court they're waiting for directions from client. Mar 28, 2012: Plaintiff withdraws lawsuit. |
|
hm @videotron.ca |
hm
Anon
2013-Feb-15 4:17 pm
said by resa1983:Mar 28, 2012: Plaintiff withdraws lawsuit. TY!. Didn't see that. So now I wonder, why did the Voltage lawyer bitch back at Teksavvys lawyer about this? |
|
resa1983 Premium Member join:2008-03-10 North York, ON |
resa1983
Premium Member
2013-Feb-15 4:20 pm
said by hm :said by resa1983:Mar 28, 2012: Plaintiff withdraws lawsuit. TY!. Didn't see that. So now I wonder, why did the Voltage lawyer bitch back at Teksavvys lawyer about this? Either they (Voltage's laweyers) didn't know about the settlements, or didn't think TSI had the previous Voltage court docket in front of them to prove to the judge right then that the previous case went nowhere. |
|
hm @videotron.ca |
hm
Anon
2013-Feb-15 4:27 pm
I hope TSI's lawyers are looking into seeing if there are any Voltage assets in Canada.
Or at the next hearing (which may or may not occur) demand payment due to their hit & run style. |
|
|
random
Anon
2013-Feb-15 7:08 pm
If Voltage don't pay up, Distributel and any future victim ISP in Canada could invite them to their court hearing as witness. |
|
your moderator at work
hidden : Other reason
|
Tong join:2012-12-11 r3t 38x |
to random
Re: Voltage Versus Teksavvy, Round 2 ContinuedI just found funny, there are no mentioning of this decision on the » copyrightenforcement.ca website and it seems they also don't allow people comment anymore either. I wonder why...... hmm.. |
|
mazhurg Premium Member join:2004-05-02 Brighton, ON |
mazhurg
Premium Member
2013-Feb-16 12:00 am
Oh, you can comment. They just "moderate" them |
|
hm @videotron.ca |
hm
Anon
2013-Feb-28 3:35 pm
Update Via Marc: CIPPIC Submitted two affidavit's from expert witnesses: » www.teksavvy.com/Media/D ··· mall.pdf» www.teksavvy.com/Media/D ··· mall.pdfHaven't read them yet. |
|
resa1983 Premium Member join:2008-03-10 North York, ON |
resa1983
Premium Member
2013-Feb-28 3:46 pm
First is from CIPPIC's articleing student - He dug up every single Voltage case in the US, and submitted the first page of each as evidence, and referenced the earlier Voltage suit here in Canada, stating the courts can pull that case themselves.
Second is from a professor who has studied p2p systems. Gives quite a few reasons why "An IP is not necessarily the subscriber", along with reasons why someone can be using another's connection without the subscribers' knowledge. |
|
dillyhammerSTART me up Premium Member join:2010-01-09 Scarborough, ON 1 edit |
That's a salvo fired right across Voltage's ass stern bow.
Mike |
|
sbrook Mod join:2001-12-14 Ottawa |
I hope you mean across their bow, since across their stern means that they missed and if they carry on in the direction they're heading all subsequent shots will miss too! |
|
dillyhammerSTART me up Premium Member join:2010-01-09 Scarborough, ON |
Yeah, that's what I meant. The other stern. Fixed. Mike |
|