dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3629
share rss forum feed

MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to QuantumPimp

Re: Bravo Distributel!

My bad...


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to JohnDoe187
If we changed distributel's name to TEksavvy in the articles/blogs right now and it was Distributel being named and discussed as not defending anybody, everyone would be celebrating and giving TSI a high five.

BUT, because it's TSI that looks bad in this blog/articles going around there are points "missing" there are possible conspiracies. It's a double standard around here. Argue all you want, but if this these things were the other way around no one would be saying shit all.

As far as i'm concerned it's a loose loose for anyone unless it's TSI simply because people can't seem to grasp that TSI's position on this whole thing was a head scratcher.

said by MrMazda86:

I'm well aware that it's everywhere... This particular blog on the other hand tries to make Distributel look better than they are and tries to make TekSavvy look like they're not doing anything. What it doesn't mention though is that TekSavvy was actually the first company to stand up and have the balls to say no. It also doesn't mention anything about the fact that TekSavvy has NEVER just rolled over and handed out such information... Just sayin'

Are you insulted some how that distributel appears better then TSI? Where is your unbiased opinion? Sure a year ago Distributel was mess, so was TSI. They've cleaned up quite a bit and reviews are getting better everywhere, their prices are better then TSI. (i should mention though they are getting better i still choose TSI for my internet)

End of the day they are another IISP trying to make ends meet, no better no worse then TSI. TSI != god. TSI DID NOT say no. They asked for time to notify. That's it. Why should it mention something that isn't truthful? TSI planned to hand over information, they asked for some time once again to hand this information out.

said by camelot:



TSI has done the right thing.

Since you think they did "the right thing". I guess Distributel is doing the wrong thing? I don't get your reasoning.

said by TypeS:

In it you can read how Distributel initially took the same stance as TekSavvy in November. Now they've reversed. Perhaps the backlash all over the internet about TekSavvy's stance might have changed their minds. I personally question their motives, it could just be a stunt to save face and get a better public image or they could genuinely want to fight to privacy rights.

Do i agree they changed their position after the Teksavvy backlash? Yup. Do i agree it was a stunt? Not likely. As everyone so often comments on is TSI's small margins. Same goes for distributel's margins. It's not smart business to try and be a hero over another ISP and go bankrupt to look good. It'll cost them a lot of money if the 'stunt' goes wrong. I think they're doing what should be done. Standing their ground to trolls.

said by TypeS:

People need to stop being arm-chair laywers/politicians/network engineers/accountants/CEOs on these forums.

+1 to this, specifically the arm-chair lawyers. Though i am the owner and CEO of my company and i am as involved as my lawyers in our battles with copyright and my customers, i've expressed my opinions long ago when this all began.


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·TekSavvy Cable
You once again make the baseless assumption that I am insulted or angered Tx.

I already stated I am neutral whether one company defends or the other sits on the fence. But I question Distributel's motives, mainly because why did they not take that stance back in November when NGN Prima first contacted them?

This the second time I've read that TSI actually agree to handover the information so willingly. Does anyone have a source where TSI actually admitted they planned on just handing it over? I'm pretty sure PIPEDA stops any company from doing that, they'd be in a pretty bad legal bind if they handed any information over without a court order or valid reasoning.

Even the blogger the OP posted a link is showing some bias in his writing in misconstruing the $190k figure TekSavvy brought up in court. And the blogger openly admits to disagree with other notable people as well.

Bottom line, that at least for now, no one is right or wrong. And it merely comes down to beliefs and opinions.
Expand your moderator at work


apvm

join:2003-02-14
London, ON
kudos:1
reply to TypeS

Re: Bravo Distributel!

Don't understand the logic here. You paid them money for their service and give them loyalty at the same time! Well my boss pays me salary and he expects my loyalty.

My logic is, I paid Teksavvy money and I expect them to be loyal to me. Maybe I am not a fan boy and do not understand this loyalty thing.

Teksavvy is not going to oppose Voltage, any angle you look at it. End of story.
Expand your moderator at work


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to apvm

Re: Bravo Distributel!

I didn't say they opposed Voltage, they're letting it play it out in the courts.

Just how far should an ISP be loyal to a paying customer? How far backwards should they bend over for customers?

They're job is to secure your information and not give it out to anyone without just cause. They're job isn't to define what that just cause is. That's the courts and legislators jobs to do.
Expand your moderator at work

funny_one
Previously known as 'Deadpool'

join:2010-11-01
reply to apvm

Re: Bravo Distributel!

Your boss pays you a salary and expects you to do your job. He doesn't care of you're loyal or not. I can guarantee you he isn't loyal to you.

You pay Teksavvy for a service, which does not include loyalty. Maybe I'm an idiot and I missed that in the fine print somewhere or don't understand what to expect from an ISP.

Legally, they can't. And they haven't. They've simply delayed the inevitable.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
said by funny_one:

Your boss pays you a salary and expects you to do your job. He doesn't care of you're loyal or not. I can guarantee you he isn't loyal to you.

You pay Teksavvy for a service, which does not include loyalty. Maybe I'm an idiot and I missed that in the fine print somewhere or don't understand what to expect from an ISP.

Legally, they can't. And they haven't. They've simply delayed the inevitable.

Your username is confusingly close to a certain other poster on this forum. Your posts are not incoherent rambling as his are, though, so I guess it's not hard to tell you two apart once someone reads what you've written. Perhaps you might consider a name that isn't so similar, however.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


QuantumPimp

join:2012-02-19
Reviews:
·voip.ms
reply to Tx
said by Tx:

said by camelot:

TSI has done the right thing.

Since you think they did "the right thing". I guess Distributel is doing the wrong thing? I don't get your reasoning.

I want my ISP to apply the very best standard when protecting proprietary information. Period.

To that end you've asked a serious question Tx. Which strategy is best? Has TSI raised the cost to Voltage high enough to sour the business case of trolling their customers? Will Distributel mount an effective defense? Whatever path is chosen we should be aware that case law is being defined so a poor defense may be worse than no defense.


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

I didn't say they opposed Voltage, they're letting it play it out in the courts.

Just how far should an ISP be loyal to a paying customer? How far backwards should they bend over for customers?

They're job is to secure your information and not give it out to anyone without just cause. They're job isn't to define what that just cause is. That's the courts and legislators jobs to do.

You make it sound like they are doing customers a favor. Since when is any business doing a customer a favor? I run a business to make money, i'm not giving it away, they're paying for it. Our business bends over backwards to keep customers when something goes wrong. If you haven't noticed so does Marc. It's bending over backwards if it's a free service which it is not.

Instead the businesses should be bending over backwards in this cut throat world of business to keep their business a float. That's how the world turns. When you realize customers are #1 and businesses adhere to THEIR needs because that's how they make money then you'll be one step closer to understanding why a business doesn't just turn their back on a customer because a customer expects a service etc.

Don't get me wrong TypeS, i completely agree with you a lot of the time. You're a smart dude (hope dude, sorry if you're not) but in this industry it's about the customer, not about the business. As a business owner myself it was insanely difficult to establish myself at first 17 years ago. Trying to make a name for my business.

My business is only as relevant as my customers say it is, not the other way around.

said by MFido:

... Edited since mods deleted his post

Wow, this forum may have some heated debates, valued opinions everywhere from every member. That said people that turn to this kind of personal attack and insult should be banned. This is no place to attack anyone like that.

Blocked or not, people like this are the spoils of a good forum. Grow up.


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

said by Tx:

said by camelot:

TSI has done the right thing.

Since you think they did "the right thing". I guess Distributel is doing the wrong thing? I don't get your reasoning.

I want my ISP to apply the very best standard when protecting proprietary information. Period.

To that end you've asked a serious question Tx. Which strategy is best? Has TSI raised the cost to Voltage high enough to sour the business case of trolling their customers? Will Distributel mount an effective defense? Whatever path is chosen we should be aware that case law is being defined so a poor defense may be worse than no defense.

To be honest. I think it's good for all of us to see. We'll see which side wins and which battle is the best way to go about this. Two IISP's taking different approaches means we'll be apart of a major precedence change in Canada. So we'll probably see which strategy is best in the coming year.

I'd say it'll be fun to watch, but not at the expense of two IISP's and their customers. Honestly i hope both win in their different ways of approaching it. I'm sure as heck not voting against either of them.


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·TekSavvy Cable

1 recommendation

reply to Tx
Well I supposed it's best to say we differ on opinions. I don't exactly agree with it being 100% consumer focused.

I agree that we'll see how it all plays it out in the end. Personally thats what I'm doing, seeing how it turns out and awaiting TSI Marc's explanation for his company's decisions on handling the matter.

funny_one
Previously known as 'Deadpool'

join:2010-11-01
reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:

said by funny_one:

Your boss pays you a salary and expects you to do your job. He doesn't care of you're loyal or not. I can guarantee you he isn't loyal to you.

You pay Teksavvy for a service, which does not include loyalty. Maybe I'm an idiot and I missed that in the fine print somewhere or don't understand what to expect from an ISP.

Legally, they can't. And they haven't. They've simply delayed the inevitable.

Your username is confusingly close to a certain other poster on this forum. Your posts are not incoherent rambling as his are, though, so I guess it's not hard to tell you two apart once someone reads what you've written. Perhaps you might consider a name that isn't so similar, however.

You knew me once as Deadpool. However I was denied my request to re-activate that account.


TSI Martin
Premium
join:2006-02-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:33
Can't you just change your username bud.

Long time no talk... glad to see you are still dropping in.


Martin


QuantumPimp

join:2012-02-19
Reviews:
·voip.ms
reply to Tx
said by Tx:

I'd say it'll be fun to watch, but not at the expense of two IISP's and their customers. Honestly i hope both win in their different ways of approaching it. I'm sure as heck not voting against either of them.

Amen. I am still left wondering how to properly take action in support of Distributel, TekSavvy, and their customers when it comes to matters of privacy. I'm sure an in-your-face kudos to Distributel in a TekSavvy forum doesn't achieve much.

Does anyone know where to turn to have more of an effect?

JohnDoe187

join:2013-01-04
reply to TypeS
For the love of god plz get your head out of TSI's ass, it's embarrassing...

MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to Tx
Not at all... I'm just pointing out some interesting fact. It's also an interesting fact that Distributel has a very bad reputation for a number of things, such as forcing customers to give them their banking information so that they can suck the money right out of their bank account each and every month, even after they've cancelled their service. I've seen this far too often.

Of course, you could decide to go on a monthly bill provided that you both have a sufficient credit rating and you pay for 6 months at a time. This is just one such example of the many things that Distributel does that they don't tell their customers about... or at least not up front anyway.

So as for "appearing better than TSI", that's got nothing to do with my gripe.

MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON

1 edit
reply to Tx
said by Tx:

You make it sound like they are doing customers a favor. Since when is any business doing a customer a favor? I run a business to make money, i'm not giving it away, they're paying for it. Our business bends over backwards to keep customers when something goes wrong.

Although this comment wasn't directed at me, I think it may be useful to point something out on this note, just as a comparative example.

While I agree that yes, it is true that businesses are undoubtedly in business to make money, there are circumstances (even when things don't go wrong) where a business may do favours for their customers in exchange for years of customer loyalty. These "favours" aren't free per say, but rather are a part of delivering an excellence in customer service. It's a "long-time customer perk" for lack of a better term, and I'll explain what I mean.

My mother found a good and honest mechanic (which are hard to find these days), and in turn, referred me to them. I since have been doing business with this mechanic for the last 10 years myself, without ever having to chase me for money. In fact, there was a time when they accidentally let me drive away without actually having paid, but because I felt that I needed to be honest about it, I brought it to their attention and got the bill squared away. This developed a "customer relationship", which can be very hard to come by. Here's where the "favour" comes in...

Recently, I had my car leave me on the side of the highway, resulting in having to call a tow truck to bring it in. I of course had no money at that exact time, but desperately needed my car to be able to tend to business matters. Because of the previous customer relationship with my mechanic (and never having to chase me for money), he went ahead with the repairs anyway, knowing that I didn't have the money up front. When it was all said and done, I drove away that day with a $1018.46 bill, without paying a dime.

The arrangement was that given that I've been a very high paying customer for some time, have referred them a plethora of business, and have NEVER been a hassle for paying my bill, they allowed me to come back in just over a week later to pay down the first $790 of the bill, and give them a post-dated cheque for the end of February (1 month later) for the remaining $228.46. In the end, my mechanic still made the money off of me, but did me a "favour" by being flexible with me by cutting me a break on such a hefty bill, knowing that I *NEVER* bounce cheques.

The point of this is quite simple really. Sometimes it's the little things that businesses can do as customer appreciation gestures or "favours" if you will that add up in the grand scheme of things. They still make the same amount of money, but don't necessarily have to be greedy about it. This kind of thing can in the right context, which can dramatically improve the financial gain of a business because it ensures that not only does the customer remain happy, but that the customer will come back as well.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that businesses should give "freebies" for customers, because with already discounted rates and slim profit margins, that could be what sinks their boat, but there is a certain amount of "wiggle room" (for lack of a better term) that a business has to be able to offer that special something that their competition either can't or won't. When it comes to internet providers, there are a number of things that they can do as "favours" for customers (especially long-time customers) that better help with customer retention. After all, what one must not loose sight of is that in any business, the customer is always the most important key. The reason for this is quite simple... If there's no customer, there's no business.

While I completely agree that businesses cannot just provide "freebies" to everyone as that would bankrupt them quite quickly, I cannot say that I agree fully that they shouldn't or otherwise don't do favours for customers sometimes. In my opinion, when such things are balanced out and the individual circumstances of any given customer are taken into account, there are some cases where doing a customer a "favour" may mean a smaller immediate gain, but result in repeat business that they may not necessarily have had without having taken that "1-time loss". The key to this however is discretion and moderation.

One last thing on that note... By focusing on protecting the customer from things like copyright BS (or at least making every reasonable effort to do so), in the end, you could see this as a means of trying to protect your investment by keeping your customers.


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to MrMazda86
said by MrMazda86:

Not at all... I'm just pointing out some interesting fact. It's also an interesting fact that Distributel has a very bad reputation for a number of things, such as forcing customers to give them their banking information so that they can suck the money right out of their bank account each and every month, even after they've cancelled their service. I've seen this far too often.

Of course, you could decide to go on a monthly bill provided that you both have a sufficient credit rating and you pay for 6 months at a time. This is just one such example of the many things that Distributel does that they don't tell their customers about... or at least not up front anyway.

So as for "appearing better than TSI", that's got nothing to do with my gripe.

Forcing? No. You're a new member on the forums or a new account. Though i may be wrong, i cannot properly guess how long you've been a TSI customer, but there was a time where TSI ONLY accepted pre auth or credit card as well. "sucking" the money as you say out of the customers.

This isn't uncommon practice. In fact, i find this helps me with paying bills on time and not "forgetting" to pay them


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to MrMazda86
My comment wasn't about freebies but about customers feeling "thankful" for what they are given. I don't agree with this sentiment. Businesses should be grateful for their customers remaining their customers. My comment was only IF something was given to you for free should a customer be grateful, because now the business is doing something they do not need to do.

JohnDoe187

join:2013-01-04
It's the lack of competition in Canada that brain washes these zombies to believe they have it good... Sad really.

ftp1020

join:2007-01-30
Canada
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to TSI Martin
said by TSI Martin:

Can't you just change your username bud.

Long time no talk... glad to see you are still dropping in.


Martin

Guys, those Bell stains don't wash out, y'know. No matter how much black you layer over top of it, there's still a faint blue mark. I have bank stains; they don't come out either.

As per this discussion: I *expect* my ISP to obey the law, and I *hope* (and only hope) they are proactive about things like privacy. I pay them money, however, to provide me with internet service.

So far, so good!

MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to Tx
said by Tx:

Forcing? No. You're a new member on the forums or a new account. Though i may be wrong, i cannot properly guess how long you've been a TSI customer, but there was a time where TSI ONLY accepted pre auth or credit card as well. "sucking" the money as you say out of the customers.

This isn't uncommon practice. In fact, i find this helps me with paying bills on time and not "forgetting" to pay them

If this is such a "common" practice, why is it that Distributel seems to be the *only* provider out there that requires this? Other providers either never have, or have done away with the whole forced pre-auth thing completely.

I do agree though that the pre-auth is a great way to not forget to pay your bill, but one must also take that with a caution because pre-auth is far too often abused, rather than being used for the "good" purpose in which it was intended.


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
said by MrMazda86:

said by Tx:

Forcing? No. You're a new member on the forums or a new account. Though i may be wrong, i cannot properly guess how long you've been a TSI customer, but there was a time where TSI ONLY accepted pre auth or credit card as well. "sucking" the money as you say out of the customers.

This isn't uncommon practice. In fact, i find this helps me with paying bills on time and not "forgetting" to pay them

If this is such a "common" practice, why is it that Distributel seems to be the *only* provider out there that requires this? Other providers either never have, or have done away with the whole forced pre-auth thing completely.

I do agree though that the pre-auth is a great way to not forget to pay your bill, but one must also take that with a caution because pre-auth is far too often abused, rather than being used for the "good" purpose in which it was intended.

You need to broaden your scope a little. This is common practice among business in Canada. For example, my hydro bill is preauth. It's the only option we were given. My insurance is pre-auth, it's the only option we were given.

TSI rid of it because yes there were many complaints on some mistaken billing including myself as i was one of those back when Rocky was at the helm. Point is, just because distributel does it how is it even relevant to make them in to some bad guy for it? It's their form of payment. Some prefer not chasing customers.

People should be paying their bills, and it costs money to chase people. Some move away from it, some do not.

I pay my internet, cable, sirius sat among other bills with online banking, others like my hydro, insurance etc are pre-auth. Common-practice.

Though i will agree with you that i can be abused like bell has been known for taking money out they aren't entitled to, double payments and a fight to get the credit or their money back. PAP is good as long as it's a company who is good with billing.

Saying all of this, PAP is no different then handing your credit card info. Just because you haven't (assuming you haven't) doesn't mean no one else has, because trust me. A lot of TSI customers over the years from what i've seen pay their TSI bills this way.


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

PAP is good as long as it's a company who is good with billing.

PaP is as good as the company is, as long as the company remains that way.

Frankly, I think it should be a criminal offense to require any PaP as a condition of doing business. Letting any company tap into your wealth at their discretion is Not A Good Thing [TM], ever.

Get a bill. Read your bill. If bill is good, pay the bill. If bill is bad, send it back, and no payment until a proper bill is presented.

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

Jaxom

join:2012-03-10
East York, ON
reply to JohnDoe187
Boo hoo. A bunch of people who got caught pirating horrible movies and are now blaming Teksavvy for their own actions. Take responsibility kids. Your ISP shouldn't have to pay your legal fees for your actions.

Maybe next election don't vote for a party that made it easier for such frivolous copyright lawsuits to happen.

MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
said by Jaxom:

Boo hoo. A bunch of people who got caught pirating horrible movies and are now blaming Teksavvy for their own actions. Take responsibility kids. Your ISP shouldn't have to pay your legal fees for your actions.

Maybe next election don't vote for a party that made it easier for such frivolous copyright lawsuits to happen.

Actually, in my case, that's not the case at all... It's a matter of principle and of standing up for the law. After all, FIPPA is supposed to protect the end consumer from certain breaches of privacy, however there are some trolls out there who feel that they are above the law.

Also, what you fail to take into account is that the alleged pirate often times did not actually commit any wrongful act. This is seen far too often when copyright trolls try to exploit a little ma & pa couple who know nothing about P2P or BitTorrent. What's more sickening than that is that an IP address may identify a subscriber by virtue of the name listed on the internet account, but this does not always identify the end user.

For example, where I'm currently residing now, if I were to unlawfully download something such as a movie, music, porn, or whatever, such a trolling company could in theory establish my IP address as being the "infringing IP", however when the word gets back to the provider, it's not me that will be identified because the service in this location is in my father's name. This type of situation is more common in residences which either have a shared living accommodation, or are otherwise not single dwelling units.

The problem comes in that there is no proof of who was physically on the other end of the computer to initiate the actual connection, and THAT'S what needs to be proven. Other cases include public wireless access, or cases where a person installs a wireless router (or worse yet, being given one by Rogers who uses NO security at all) and fails to secure it adequately. These cases are most often either Rogers customers who receive a modem/router combo unit that does not come with any encryption or instructions on how to access the web interface, or customers who are told by their provider that their "all in one" modem/router is secure. I've seen this far too often with my customers who have subscribed to internet from Hell Telecom (formerly Bell) where they are provided a 2-Wire 2701HG-G, which by default is secured with WEP.

There's a lot of factors to take into account when making these kinds of allegations, and ultimately the problem comes in where it becomes absolutely unreasonable to assume that the subscriber of the service as listed on the account is the end user. You can prove a link to a subscriber with an IP address, but not the end-user. This fact alone plays a big part in why such a trolling expedition violates a number of laws and needs to be stood up against. It's one thing if it's a single connection with only one computer for which only one person has access, but most often, this is just not the case.

It's not about blaming the provider, but rather about stopping these trolling expeditions and the manner in which they resemble a phishing scam for the sole purpose of extortion. THAT'S the issue... NOT the provider.


QuantumPimp

join:2012-02-19
Reviews:
·voip.ms

1 edit
reply to Jaxom
said by Jaxom:

Boo hoo. A bunch of people who got caught pirating horrible movies and are now blaming Teksavvy for their own actions. Take responsibility kids. Your ISP shouldn't have to pay your legal fees for your actions.

Perpetuating that stereotype is just plain mean spirited. Kinda like "He beats her because she deserves it". On the other hand you could feel some empathy for those who are being victimized. Your choice.

said by Jaxom:

Maybe next election don't vote for a party that made it easier for such frivolous copyright lawsuits to happen.

Is this truely what has happened? Yes, I know there were changes to the law but I thought the new laws reduced statutory damages for non-commecrial infringement. Seems like trolling could have happened regardless.