said by MrMazda86:
1. I have serious doubt on the credibility of the source.
2. It's posted on a BlogSpot, with no published source reference, which means that anyone could have written it and made this claim, but it isn't necessarily accurate, and there's no way of being able to provide recourse for error.
3. Further, it makes NO mention about Distributel having rolled over and forked out information upon the first request that they received.
4. I suggest you check your facts and follow-up with your sources before trying to make a claim about a product or a service (or service provider), when the information contained within contradicts MANY other credible sources.
5. (EDIT: Upon closer examination, it seems that there are actually statements against TSI within this article that are inconsistent with proven fact, as cited within the publicly accessible court documents... It's sad really.)
1 & 2: The source is one of the most highly regarded copyright lawyers in all of Canada. The sources (which can be seen on his page since he links to them) are the actual court documents. In addition, the CEO of Distributel even posted there.
3. It does, you just didn't bother reading. It is within Distributels court filing.
4. Sadly, I think you are the one in need to check.
5. Nothing is inconsistent. Unless you wish to say the facts presented there by one of the biggest names in copyright law don't jive with whatever perception you dreamed up.
Do you think it's one of Canada's top law blogs because of fabricated and made up stuff? Or could it be that you lack the comprehension skills to follow it?