dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
6528

GoGoGoatCart
@198.103.221.x

GoGoGoatCart

Anon

Voltage vs. Teksavvy progress: Continuing to annoy the judge?

Case docket URL: »cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj. ··· 2058-122

> Oral directions received from the Court: Roza Aronovitch, Prothonotary dated 28-JUL-2014 directing that Re: Correspondence dated July 25, 2014. Contentious matters are not decided at case conferences. Given TekSavvy's refusal to consent to the process proposed by Voltage, Voltage would require a motion to serve its evidence following cross-examination of TekSavvy. I see no basis in the facts and concerns set out in Mr. Ziberra's correspondence to justify deviating from the general rule that is meant to preclude a party from splitting its case. Accordingly, Voltage can bring a formal motion which motion should be served and filed within seven days, or it can serve its evidence in accordance with the timetable, proceed to cross-examinations, and thereafter seek leave to introduce supplementary evidence, as appropriate placed on file on 28-JUL-2014 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies)

By an amazing coincidence I also see no basis in the facts and concerns set out in Mr. Ziberra's anything.

I guess he wanted to make it look like TSI is inflating the money they've spent in helping the trolls troll and the court isn't having any of it.

You'd think if this was all about protecting their copyright and their very survival of the movie industry they'd have no problem paying whatever.

Yet here they are, almost like the money is the only thing that matters.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

said by GoGoGoatCart :

Yet here they are, almost like the money is the only thing that matters.

For Voltage it's all about the money.
JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

JMJimmy to GoGoGoatCart

Member

to GoGoGoatCart
Bad link?

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

Guspaz to GoGoGoatCart

MVM

to GoGoGoatCart
Yep, the link is bogus.

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

For Voltage it's all about the money.

Yup, they're just trying to keep this on life support until they can pursue a viable financial avenue, if not, they're going to try and kill it.
Samgee
join:2010-08-02
canada

Samgee to GoGoGoatCart

Member

to GoGoGoatCart
»cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj. ··· -2058-12

fkng_trolls
@95.143.198.x

fkng_trolls to GoGoGoatCart

Anon

to GoGoGoatCart
If there is no money - there are no trolls. Simple. And it looks like the court is very well aware about it. Besides there are too many cases that prove just that - trolls are here to extort money from average Jane + John Joe by exploiting legal system.

GoGoGoatCart
@198.103.223.x

GoGoGoatCart to JMJimmy

Anon

to JMJimmy
Sorry, I just cut and pasted it from the other thread, not sure why it's not working?

»cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj. ··· -2058-12

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues to GoGoGoatCart

Premium Member

to GoGoGoatCart
This has nothing to do with making money, considering we're pushing 1.5yrs on this case, the legal fees (not to mention what they have to pay teksavvy) is going to outweigh any cash that they may glean from the "does".

It's about setting a precedent. If and when they get what they want, they're going after everyone with guns ablasting.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

TwiztedZero to fkng_trolls

Premium Member

to fkng_trolls
Just wait for the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement to suddenly become enforceable then all this will turn on a dime and go the very way Voltage wants it to regardless what Canadian law says because the Treaty will have superseded our copyright laws on the matter. All because Canada is a signatory country on the TPP agreement and has zero voice in the direction or policies its designed for. The United States will then use this to subjugate the rest of the planet to their way of doing things by force of U.S. Law & levying sanctions on those that don't comply.

--- Up Shit Creek - No Paddle ---

MeowToo
@50.97.94.x

MeowToo to elwoodblues

Anon

to elwoodblues
That could be part of it but precedents are two-way streets, the judge could say the first case fine is $100 for instance.

Clearly this court is unimpressed with Voltage and Voltage isn't doing much to change that impression.

fkng_trolls
@95.143.198.x

fkng_trolls to elwoodblues

Anon

to elwoodblues
said by elwoodblues:

It's about setting a precedent. If and when they get what they want, they're going after everyone with guns ablasting.

That might be correct. However, if it is all about setting a precedent there should not be a problem to pay TSI and get subs info as soon as possible. TSI is a business for profit and has a right for reimbursement of hours spent and legal fees. In the meantime TSI legal fees are piling up because trolls are dragging it for MONETARY reasons... The court is not happy as well - taxpayer's money is a-wasting.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

Voltage isn't happy that TSI's costs are more than $1 for everything, and that TSI didn't roll over and play dead like other ISP's (despite some who opine otherwise) so they're crying up a storm to see if the court will reduce the costs awarded to TSI.

Voltage_BS
@185.17.184.x

Voltage_BS to GoGoGoatCart

Anon

to GoGoGoatCart
Another docket update, hearing moved to December 8th after trolls tried to be a smartasses

"Oral directions received from the Court: Roza Aronovitch, Prothonotary dated 30-JUL-2014 directing that paragraph 8 of the June 4, 2014 direction is amended as follows: 8. The matter shall be heard on December 8, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. in Toronto for one day placed on file on 30-JUL-2014 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies)"
resa1983
Premium Member
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON

1 edit

resa1983 to GoGoGoatCart

Premium Member

to GoGoGoatCart
Looks like I have another day to book off as vacation. Should be interesting.

EDIT: I have an Anker charger now, so my battery should be good all day.
JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

JMJimmy to Voltage_BS

Member

to Voltage_BS
said by Voltage_BS :

Another docket update, hearing moved to December 8th after trolls tried to be a smartasses

"Oral directions received from the Court: Roza Aronovitch, Prothonotary dated 30-JUL-2014 directing that paragraph 8 of the June 4, 2014 direction is amended as follows: 8. The matter shall be heard on December 8, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. in Toronto for one day placed on file on 30-JUL-2014 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies)"

Umm, that's further off than the original November 13th date.

I am curious to know what TSI's final bill to them was

GoGoGoatCart
@198.103.152.x

GoGoGoatCart

Anon

Not only is it further off but I suspect that the court will take another 6 months before they come back with an answer which will most likely be, unless TSI is lying, pay it before you get any names like the court originally said.

The bill, so far, was north of $200 IIRC, the Trolls just about gagged when they first heard it and I'm guessing its only gotten bigger since.

It's amazing that Voltage is still plugging ahead, I guess dreams of free money are hard to let go of.

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

Guspaz to GoGoGoatCart

MVM

to GoGoGoatCart
The trolls don't like that TekSavvy did their due diligence and investigated each and every IP directly, including getting the CEO himself to sign off on the results... and the CEO didn't just rubber stamp it. CEO time ain't cheap, but it's the right thing to do to make sure private information isn't being released that doesn't have to be.

GoGoGoatCart
@198.103.223.x

GoGoGoatCart

Anon

No, due-diligence is something trolls are not keen on, it was so funny, they thought that TSI was helping them at first and at each step of the way they get tripped and there's TSI going "I'm sorry, did I do that? Oh no, how did CIPPIC get in here?!? The court says you have to pay us $200,000? Ah jeez, we feel.... awful... just awful about that."

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues

Premium Member

In the US, stuff like this is typically rubber stamped by a judge, whose eyes glaze over with the technical details.

At the same time, the more "enlightened" judges are starting to see what these guys are, nothing more then trolls.
JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

JMJimmy to GoGoGoatCart

Member

to GoGoGoatCart
They have to pay the costs whether they walk away or not.

TSI's figure is actually low compared to Bhell/Robbers. I think the figure was around $90/IP where Bhell is $100+ and Robbers is $150+. Just wondered how their stall tactics might have further bumped up the figure from lawyers fees.

Volrage_BS
@95.211.224.x

Volrage_BS

Anon

Actually isn't there a chance for trolls to walk away without paying TSI based on a judgement? Or they are already on a hook to pay TSI costs regardless whether they want subs data or not? I think there still a chance for them to crawl back to their holywood hole without paying unless TSI sues them for damages. Anyone has insight into that version?
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

I'd have to go back to the original case discussions, but I thought Voltage was required to post a bond because they have no assets in Canada. Could be wrong though.
jkoblovsky
join:2011-09-27
Keswick, ON

jkoblovsky to GoGoGoatCart

Member

to GoGoGoatCart
A few things politically I'm a bit worried about on this issue. Nice to see the government involved in this discussion GoGoGoatCart (nice IP). I'm sure the Government of Canada considering bill S4 is rooting for ISPs to make quite a lot of cash outside of reasonable costs, to ensure the profitability of disclosure moving forward. The more profitable this becomes, the less resistance to bills like S4 and disclosures down the road from the telecommunications industry.

Snowden himself during the SXWX conference stated that the problem with technology companies is that in general when we are speaking about the profitability of user data; it erodes trust within our digital communications network, makes us less secure when those who profit over such activities are thinking about their bottom line (both TSI and Voltage are guilty of that), and probably why we have dragnet surveillance to begin with.

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· j4N2teWw


If Voltage was smart, it wouldn't be trying to reduce the costs it should pay TSI the full amount they've disclosed. If they try to reduce the costs, it might actually make this situation less profitable for Internet Service Providers, thus they would be more inclined to protect their users data in future cases.

From the looks of it, the court will rule what would be considered reasonable costs to be awarded in this situation, which will definitely set a precedent moving forward in non-copyright related cases, and have far reaching affects on current public policy and legislation past this case. Those cheering on TSI here, who are concerned about the security of their personal information, might want to be careful what they wish for.

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

Guspaz to GoGoGoatCart

MVM

to GoGoGoatCart
Costs too high for a troll to make a profit off extortion is a far better outcome than costs too low for ISPs to recover their costs.

In the scenario you propose, trolls get cart blanche to get all the personal details they want (because costs go below possible reward), and ISPs have to foot the bill since they are compelled to disclose by the court regardless of how big or small their costs are.

GoGoGoatCart
@198.103.223.x

GoGoGoatCart to jkoblovsky

Anon

to jkoblovsky
The government is not involved, in no way do I represent any other interest in this matter than my own.

You understand that people who work for the GoC do have Internet access from their office and use it at lunch and break times?
jkoblovsky
join:2011-09-27
Keswick, ON

jkoblovsky to Guspaz

Member

to Guspaz

said by Guspaz See ProfileCosts too high for a troll to make a profit off extortion is a far better outcome than costs too low for ISPs to recover their costs.

I disagree with that ideology and "theory". It's a much better outcome to solidify user rights within the courts. I think the NSA disclosures and those who are actually fighting for user rights online, like Snowden would disagree with that ideology as well.

JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

JMJimmy to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

I'd have to go back to the original case discussions, but I thought Voltage was required to post a bond because they have no assets in Canada. Could be wrong though.

Not sure if they did or not... they do have Canadian assets though, their entire distribution arm here + IP assets that can be auctioned off (probably not worth much though)

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

Guspaz to GoGoGoatCart

MVM

to GoGoGoatCart
I think the idea that making it cheaper for trolls to get our private data would somehow help protect our private data is absurd.

Besides that, I don't care about the government getting my private data. I do care about trolls getting it.

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook to JMJimmy

Mod

to JMJimmy
I think guspaz and jkoblovsky have good points.

If the high costs are accepted by the trolls and they go on to run the extortion process, then they will attempt to find ways to get higher returns and we will go through this same process again and again. It also means that the trolls will go for as many as possible to extort money - more than they'd go for with lower costs.

If a low cost, the same process guarantees they'll go for the future and the court process to disclose will become all too easy and the floodgates will open if the next stages work too.