dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7
share rss forum feed


lleader

join:2011-01-01
Mississauga, ON

1 recommendation

reply to TSI Marc

Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.

I think you guys badmouthing TSI were sucked in just like the bad guys. I believe TSI knew what cards they were going to play today - they just weren't about to discuss it here in the forum and tip their hand. How many times were they asked if all the notices were out to all the affected people? They never answered directly. They said they weren't going to fight it - but lo and behold they came armed.

tired

join:2010-12-12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
said by lleader:

I think you guys badmouthing TSI were sucked in just like the bad guys. I believe TSI knew what cards they were going to play today - they just weren't about to discuss it here in the forum and tip their hand.

Are you really suggesting that Teksavvy deliberately misinformed some people that they were targets when they weren't, and at the same time not inform people who were? I don't believe it.

In fact, it's more than a little disturbing. How many other mistakes are there in the data that haven't been noticed -- either made by TSI or by CaniPre? One of Shaw's objections for not wanting to reveal the owners of IP addresses back in the BMG case was that they didn't want to open themselves up to lawsuits from their customers if there were mistakes made: "Moreover, if Shaw were asked to speculate or required to guess at this type of conclusion
about the identity of users or subscribers, Shaw is concerned that it would be required to assume a liability for incorrect information. Shaw might well find itself having to respond to a financial or other type of claim or to a complaint under PIPEDA by a subscriber if the conclusions or guesses were incorrect."

Which all leads me to wonder... If somebody is falsely accused and they can prove their innocence, do they have the right to sue TSI and/or Voltage for costs and damages? I'm starting to feel more and more sorry for Teksavvy and the unenviable position where they've been placed.

Bhruic

join:2002-11-27
Toronto, ON
kudos:2
reply to lleader
said by lleader:

I think you guys badmouthing TSI were sucked in just like the bad guys.

I honestly have no idea why so many people think that no one from Voltage is reading this forum. It's almost guarunteed that they are. People should be acting accordingly.

tired

join:2010-12-12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
said by Bhruic:

I honestly have no idea why so many people think that no one from Voltage is reading this forum.

Stop blaming your losses on piracy. If you want to make more money then make films that people would actually want to go see at first-run cinemas instead of taking great actors and putting them in films that leave people wondering if it's worth taking a chance before dropping $1.50 in a RedBox.


lleader

join:2011-01-01
Mississauga, ON
reply to tired
said by tired:

Are you really suggesting that Teksavvy deliberately misinformed some people that they were targets when they weren't, and at the same time not inform people who were?


I am absolutely NOT impling this. I am saying that at some point they realized this was happening and that they needed more time. But to have discussed that in this forum would have allowed the bad guys to prepare a more detailed challenge to this.


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to tired
Agreed. I tend to think piracy is a by-product of poor offering. Whether it be low quality production or limited options to buy (i.e. no digital distribution)

Threatening to put people in jail at best will stop a few people from torrenting but it won't encourage anyone to pay for the product. Many Corporations have learned that the hard way.

jkoblovsky

join:2011-09-27
Keswick, ON
kudos:2

1 edit
reply to lleader
said by lleader:

I think you guys badmouthing TSI were sucked in just like the bad guys. I believe TSI knew what cards they were going to play today - they just weren't about to discuss it here in the forum and tip their hand. How many times were they asked if all the notices were out to all the affected people? They never answered directly. They said they weren't going to fight it - but lo and behold they came armed.

Actually knowing what resulted today, they could have very easily argued they needed more time and been provided that by the courts leaving them to oppose the motion to begin with. Now, they still will not be able to oppose, and leaving it up to the CIPPIC to get involved. They are still not fighting for customers privacy, which is a bit concerning imo.
--
My Canadian Tech Podcast: »canadiantechnetwork.podbean.com/
My Self Help and Digital Policy Blog: »jkoblovsky.wordpress.com/
Expand your moderator at work