koreybReplace the CRTC NOW
join:2005-01-08
East York, ON Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy Cable
 ·voip.ms
1 edit | reply to Boop
Re: If TekSavvi doesn't fight on Jan 14th, I'm leaving them. Bye cause no ISP will fight it if ordered by the court. Good luck. Best to cancel and don't have the internet at all. The facts are the laws in Canada on copyright have changed... Teksavvy has not handed over any info yet but asked the court to rule if they should. Teksavvy if ordered to hand the info has no legal right to refuse and if they do they can be sued. The laws have changed and fighting against it at this point is pointless. The judge will rule based on the current new Canadian laws. All isps are the same.. And have Min required log retention requirements set by the new laws |
|
| said by koreyb: All isps are the same.. And have Min required log retention requirements set by the new laws
Could you please point us to what the new mandatory time is for data retention? I'm having trouble finding anything other than references to it being discussed as part of the upcoming notice to notice system. |
|
|
|
 Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| said by Fuzzy285:said by koreyb: All isps are the same.. And have Min required log retention requirements set by the new laws
Could you please point us to what the new mandatory time is for data retention? I'm having trouble finding anything other than references to it being discussed as part of the upcoming notice to notice system. I've asked him for this also and i was never answered. There is no minimum. This is giving the wrong and incorrect information out to people.
Also have a read: »www.techdirt.com/articles/201212···ll.shtml |
|
| Interesting read, even in my eggnog induced stupor.
There's a lot of misconceptions and misinformation flying around. I'm not a lawyer, but this is what my reading of the changes to the Copyright Act tell me:
For one thing, the Act requires that the ISP notify its customers as soon as feasible once it has received notice in writing in a format that meets the criteria of the Act. Not once a motion is filed with the court. Once notice in writing is received by the ISP. Teksavvy's claim that it provided notice even though not required is bunk. They were required to provide notice all the while.
Also, people seem to think they are not being sued yet. Wrong. The John Doe statement of claim was filed with federal court November 14, 2012. According to Federal Court rules, Voltage has 60 days, not counting holidays, to serve the John/Jane Doe defendants. The purpose of the Motion involving Teksavvy that was to be heard Dec/17 was just so that they can effect service against those defendants. In other words, as soon as TSI releases those names/addresses, Voltage willl be serving people. There's no need to file another, separate Statement of Claim, as far as I know. Once served (can be done by mail), a defendant has 30 days to file a defense. Those who don't file a defense risk having default judgement granted against them.
People think they'll get away with only a $100 fine. Not true, once served they MUST file a defense, and that costs money. Only after you defend yourself will Voltage offer any form of settlement or choose to discontinue.
People think TSI has not choice but keep logs for 3 months. Not true, there's no mandatory data retention period, otherwise many anonymous VPN providers wouldn't be located in Canada. What TSI can't do is destroy the logs they already have once they are notified of infringement. And they have to retain them for up to a year for those included in the notification.
People think they are not affected if they didn't get a notice until now or if they are with a different ISP. Not true, these are only 2,000 of the one million IP's that Canipre claims to have collected in the past 6 months for rights holders. They will come knocking on other doors.
Now, back to the eggnog. |
|
1 edit | Bravo. Thx you for summarizing it and going straight to the points. Some parts escaped me until this posts, especially these parts which are highly important.
"For one thing, the Act requires that the ISP notify its customers as soon as feasible once it has received notice in writing in a format that meets the criteria of the Act. Not once a motion is filed with the court. Once notice in writing is received by the ISP. Teksavvy's claim that it provided notice even though not required is bunk. They were required to provide notice all the while."
"People think TSI has not choice but keep logs for 3 months. Not true, there's no mandatory data retention period"
"People think they'll get away with only a $100 fine. Not true, once served they MUST file a defense, and that costs money. "
" these are only 2,000 of the one million IP's that Canipre claims to have collected in the past 6 months for rights holders. They will come knocking on other doors." |
|
| reply to koreyb
said by koreyb:Bye cause no ISP will fight it if ordered by the court. Good luck. Best to cancel and don't have the internet at all. The facts are the laws in Canada on copyright have changed... Teksavvy has not handed over any info yet but asked the court to rule if they should. Teksavvy if ordered to hand the info has no legal right to refuse and if they do they can be sued. The laws have changed and fighting against it at this point is pointless. The judge will rule based on the current new Canadian laws. All isps are the same.. And have Min required log retention requirements set by the new laws
yea they changed and if you or they actually read them you and tsi would know this is a bad motion to get the ids of people on account its not proper cause no ip addy can be said to be doing commercial aspects just form being in a torrent swarm.
HOWEVER it was nice to see the process early so people could prepare and ask a judge for time. MY bet is voltage might pull back ... |
|
| reply to Tx
said by Tx:said by Fuzzy285:said by koreyb: All isps are the same.. And have Min required log retention requirements set by the new laws
Could you please point us to what the new mandatory time is for data retention? I'm having trouble finding anything other than references to it being discussed as part of the upcoming notice to notice system. I've asked him for this also and i was never answered. There is no minimum. This is giving the wrong and incorrect information out to people. Also have a read: » www.techdirt.com/articles/201212···ll.shtml marc did answer that as did one of his techs and i agree that for loads a reasons you need some time to make sure that if crap happens then you can get to it faster however 3 months is excessive and ill add anythng past a month should be tossed no reason ohter hten your info gathering ....did you pay me for stats gathering? NO then don't do it unless you get me a reduction in cost. im cheap lets make a deal. its my data of my habits. |
|
| reply to Fuzzy285
said by Fuzzy285:Interesting read, even in my eggnog induced stupor.
There's a lot of misconceptions and misinformation flying around. I'm not a lawyer, but this is what my reading of the changes to the Copyright Act tell me:
For one thing, the Act requires that the ISP notify its customers as soon as feasible once it has received notice in writing in a format that meets the criteria of the Act. Not once a motion is filed with the court. Once notice in writing is received by the ISP. Teksavvy's claim that it provided notice even though not required is bunk. They were required to provide notice all the while.
Also, people seem to think they are not being sued yet. Wrong. The John Doe statement of claim was filed with federal court November 14, 2012. According to Federal Court rules, Voltage has 60 days, not counting holidays, to serve the John/Jane Doe defendants. The purpose of the Motion involving Teksavvy that was to be heard Dec/17 was just so that they can effect service against those defendants. In other words, as soon as TSI releases those names/addresses, Voltage willl be serving people. There's no need to file another, separate Statement of Claim, as far as I know. Once served (can be done by mail), a defendant has 30 days to file a defense. Those who don't file a defense risk having default judgement granted against them.
People think they'll get away with only a $100 fine. Not true, once served they MUST file a defense, and that costs money. Only after you defend yourself will Voltage offer any form of settlement or choose to discontinue.
People think TSI has not choice but keep logs for 3 months. Not true, there's no mandatory data retention period, otherwise many anonymous VPN providers wouldn't be located in Canada. What TSI can't do is destroy the logs they already have once they are notified of infringement. And they have to retain them for up to a year for those included in the notification.
People think they are not affected if they didn't get a notice until now or if they are with a different ISP. Not true, these are only 2,000 of the one million IP's that Canipre claims to have collected in the past 6 months for rights holders. They will come knocking on other doors.
Now, back to the eggnog.
thats the rub the notice rules haven't been formalized on how hte govt wants it done , AND instead of going ot the govt and saying they want this done NOW or soon or wait they jumped the gun and tried to bypass that part. NOW they even borked the part about non commercial and commercial up and ill say it this should get tossed UTTERLY and to the rails...too much of this "evidence" has no proof that any commercial aspects could have been done. SO in that regard i'd say in my opinion your name and address mean zero other hten to try and find a numb nut dummy that has no clue and threaten them....that actually is extortion when you dont have any right to be doing it as well as black mail.
these goons called voltage better be careful.hackers already outed all there details. |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to funny
said by funny:marc did answer that as did one of his techs and i agree that for loads a reasons you need some time to make sure that if crap happens then you can get to it faster however 3 months is excessive and ill add anythng past a month should be tossed no reason ohter hten your info gathering ....did you pay me for stats gathering? NO then don't do it unless you get me a reduction in cost. im cheap lets make a deal. its my data of my habits.
Absolutely agree... ideally i'd like to see an ISP with 14 days. It's a good diagnostic time, but 30 days as you said would be fair.
Marc i know answered it and that's the issue is that koreyb keeps saying there is a minimum by law which is false and curious where he is getting his info.
He's been asked by a few people now. |
|
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·ELECTRONICBOX
| while i am all for privacy the reasons most of you have are Poor, You want license to Steal and have low chance of getting caught I really Dislike the log situation but i KNOW i won;t be getting any emails from any rightsholders Unless they are in error. So i feel good Knowing that i am covered
--
Every time Someone leaves Sympatico an Angel gets its wings.
|
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by morisato:while i am all for privacy the reasons most of you have are Poor, You want license to Steal and have low chance of getting caught I really Dislike the log situation but i KNOW i won;t be getting any emails from any rightsholders Unless they are in error. So i feel good Knowing that i am covered
lol the dead guy in the states said the same thing when he got a letter "not in error" about his activities.
You know, they're never wrong and it is after all a license to "steal" lol...
You people that keep saying that have no clue what theft is. You aren't stealing an item, the content still exists where it was, it's not theft, it's not stealing. Good lord people are so high on their pedestals they don't even know the difference. |
|
 A LurkerPremium
join:2007-10-27
Burlington, ON | reply to morisato
said by morisato:Dislike the log situation but i KNOW i won;t be getting any emails from any rightsholders Unless they are in error. So i feel good Knowing that i am covered Sigh... this is what people have been talking about for ages. Let's say you have been notified in error. How much time and money can you afford to spend to prove this? From another thread (my words):
Oddly enough, I think the most vocal people in the threads have not received a letter. I haven't (a-not a TSI customer, b-don't use torrents). However, I know the danger of fishing expeditions like this and hate to think that Voltage could possibly make more money with sending out threatening letters than they did by making movies.
It's been stated over and over, but an innocent person fighting could spend more money than the possible extortion letters could ask for. That's fine for some that can afford to fight, but what about those that can't. Also, any that do pay up just make it more likely they'll do it again, to a larger group.
I've seen a couple of numbers thrown around that says at least 2% of the original people ID'd were incorrect. That doesn't even take into account that some of the IPs may not have been provided correctly in the first place. This is from an ISP that is taking care to make sure those identifications were correct.
Take Rogers, or Cogeco, or Bell... will they be as concerned with getting the identifications correct? If you have an issue with the identification will they be responding promptly to help you. * So, let's see - a million identifications (that's what they claim they have). Could be 20,000 people getting sued under false pretenses. Could be another group that haven't done what they're being accused of... it gets messy.
It's sad really as the media companies likely are spending a fortune to try and stop the process. Research, better licensing, finding a better method to distribute, and everyone might win.
ETA: * sorry I meant to add that ~3 years ago (& 2) I got a notification from Cogeco that definitely wasn't me. A very helpful person in their security department did at least help with an explanation
Adding in, I was lucky that someone at Cogeco looked into it and answered my questions. You think they would be as helpful if a couple of thousand people were asking at once? If you're innocent and they demand say $1000 to drop the suit, could you afford to spend $5000 proving them wrong in court? Remember, as quick as you're ready to throw all people receiving notices as guilty - in front of a judge it's not like a criminal case. They would provide their evidence, your IP/name from TSI, you would say you didn't do it, and it's almost a slam dunk they judge would just assume you're lying.  |
|
 dillyhammerA. Good. Start.Premium,MVM
join:2010-01-09
Hamilton, ON
kudos:9
·Start Communicat..
·Cogeco Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·Caneris
| reply to koreyb
said by koreyb:Bye cause no ISP will fight it if ordered by the court. Good luck. Best to cancel and don't have the internet at all.
It's about sending a message. It's about standing up for some principles. Instead of being a sheep and standing around waiting for the knife to get dragged across your throat.
The court order was meant to be fought. That's how our judicial system works.
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 |
|
 elitefx
join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:1
1 edit | said by dillyhammer:The court order was meant to be fought. That's how our judicial system works. What I'd like to know is would all customers like to see their Internet bill increase to $250 or more per month so a small outfit like Teksavvy can pay a $1,000,000 plus legal bill to fight a long drawn out battle to get the information disclosure laws of Canada changed?
Appeals and Supreme Court challenges cost massive amounts of cash. How big of a price hike are you willing to pay to support your views???
Would everybody be willing to pay Teksavvy hundreds of dollars per month to fight this battle for you?
Sell your house. Sell your car. Clean out your bank account and "Let's Get Ready To Rumble"..... |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by elitefx:said by dillyhammer:The court order was meant to be fought. That's how our judicial system works. What I'd like to know is would all customers like to see their Internet bill increase to $250 or more per month so a small outfit like Teksavvy can pay a $1,000,000 plus legal bill to fight a long drawn out battle to get the information disclosure laws of Canada changed? Appeals and Supreme Court challenges cost massive amounts of cash. How big of a price hike are you willing to pay to support your views??? Would everybody be willing to pay Teksavvy hundreds of dollars per month to fight this battle for you? Sell your house. Sell your car. Clean out your bank account and "Let's Get Ready To Rumble"..... lmao!! Yes because customers subsidize the legal bills. This is how you think? You guess that bills should reach $250 a month to pay the lawyers? So your method is, unless you want your bills to skyrocket, don't expect an ISP to do anything on your behalf.
Well because we don't want those bills going up now do we.
I'm in the hosting industry (Web, domains, Servers, colo). We are faced with simular things daily. You sir, do not understand how a business works or the legalities involved annually. I guarantee i get more court orders then TSI in my business trying to get at my customers servers. We appeal everything...
Guess what? Still in business, still offering good prices and we're 17 years strong, thanks. |
|
elitefx
join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:1 | said by Tx:I'm in the hosting industry (Web, domains, Servers, colo). We are faced with simular things daily. You sir, do not understand how a business works or the legalities involved yearly. I guarantee i get more court orders then TSI in my business trying to get at my customers servers. We appeal everything... All we ever hear is hot air and bullshit. Put your money and expertise where your mouth is. Give Teksavvy a hand. Show them how it's done.
Better yet, why don't YOU mount the legal challenge? You seem to know all about it.
Time to go BIG or go home.............  |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by elitefx:said by Tx:I'm in the hosting industry (Web, domains, Servers, colo). We are faced with simular things daily. You sir, do not understand how a business works or the legalities involved yearly. I guarantee i get more court orders then TSI in my business trying to get at my customers servers. We appeal everything... All we ever hear is hot air and bullshit. Put your money and expertise where your mouth is. Give Teksavvy a hand. Show them how it's done. Better yet, why don't YOU mount the legal challenge? You seem to know all about it. Time to go BIG or go home............. lol, dude, you have no clue how a business is run clearly. Even if we had the best of the best, it's his choice to go a different direction. It has nothing to do with putting money or expertise where our mouth is.
Marc is choosing not to due to other reasons. If you'd like to know why, PM him as he's told me in PM.
Teksavvy has their own lawyers, what difference would mine make? He's the one making the business decision not to go forward with appealing the court order. How do you not get this? I don't know any other languages to tell you this. It's very basic.
The nature of my business is a bit different then theirs, but we do get more court orders then they do i'd put money on it due to the nature of my business. If we caved and gave up information each time we'd be done for. As a matter of fact we're popular for our stance on this and it does have it's downsides for attracting the wrong content and attention that follows it.
No going big or going home bud. Go ask Marc. It's his choice not to go forward. That's his right, it is after all his business at the end of the day. You make it sound like his hands are tied and he's being forced not to do anything.
In one way i admire him for knowing this wouldn't be taken very well and standing his ground for a business he and his brother built from the ground up as well. His choice, not mind, not anyones. That is after all what makes him the CEO. |
|
Txbronx cheers from cheap seatsPremium
join:2008-11-19
kudos:3 Reviews:
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:said by Tx:I'm in the hosting industry (Web, domains, Servers, colo). We are faced with simular things daily. You sir, do not understand how a business works or the legalities involved yearly. I guarantee i get more court orders then TSI in my business trying to get at my customers servers. We appeal everything... All we ever hear is hot air and bullshit. Put your money and expertise where your mouth is. Give Teksavvy a hand. Show them how it's done. Better yet, why don't YOU mount the legal challenge? You seem to know all about it. Time to go BIG or go home............. Anyway, merry christmas dude. Enjoy the time with your family. Have a good day and be safe during the new year |
|
1 edit | reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:What I'd like to know is would all customers like to see their Internet bill increase to $250 or more per month so a small outfit like Teksavvy can pay a $1,000,000 plus legal bill to fight a long drawn out battle to get the information disclosure laws of Canada changed?
Appeals and Supreme Court challenges cost massive amounts of cash. How big of a price hike are you willing to pay to support your views???
Would everybody be willing to pay Teksavvy hundreds of dollars per month to fight this battle for you?
Sell your house. Sell your car. Clean out your bank account and "Let's Get Ready To Rumble".....
Divided by the 2000 IP's affected it would be only about $500 per IP, much, much less than what TSI loses in a year of subscriptions if those accounts migrate. But like TX said, Marc has his reasons, it's his business, so whatever they are, they're by default valid.
There'll definitely be an exodus from TSI, and those who stay might opt to subscribe to private VPN's to cut down on risk. After the initial hit, TSI's exposure to this might be slightly reduced, since a lot of people will modify their downloading behavior, or be more careful with their Wifi routers, or monitor their kids better, etc. Maybe. But I don't blame customers for leaving, there's nothing fair to them about what is happening, and they are probably angry and confused.
The new Copyright laws have set penalties as low as $100 for infringement for personal use, and have made it clear they don't want mass lawsuits by trying to put together a notice to notice system, and by not requiring minimum retention times for logs. Though not perfect, I'm very surprised at how well it balances the interests of the public and those of rights holders. Voltage is doing an end run around the spirit of the new law and abusing the courts by filing their outrageous claim for commercial infringement and punitive damages. If they set this precedent, all the years of consultation and the struggle to set something fair in Canadian copyright law will be out the window.
Setting aside those wrongly accused, I don't think anybody who downloaded a Voltage movie wanted to do more than see what the movie was about. I agree with the new law: those people should pay between $100 and $5,000, depending on severity, whether they are repeat offenders, etc. That's not what is happening though: Voltage has its own agenda, and it doesn't seem to jive with the public interest at all.
TSI is, though unwittingly, in a position to try to steer this mess the right way. They DO NOT have an obligation to do so. But for some of their customers, the only way to show what they think of all this, might be to migrate, regardless as to whom.
You said that small players don't have the muscle to fight this, you might be right. On that basis, unless you are on Voltage's side in raping our Canadian laws, you might want to put your money behind the big boys, and lobby them to fight it. As ineffective as it might be, by your own reasoning, putting your money behind TSI is even less so.
Happy Christmas to all, and to all a Good Year! |
|
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·ELECTRONICBOX
| reply to Tx
While some of the people like myself have legitimate concerns The problem remains we are a minority Most folks bitching Have there hands in Cookie jars, that they should not, all in all not the end of the world and yes teksavvy could oppose it on many grounds but at the end of the Day They are not the Police, they are not the privacy commissioner etc.. They are merely a Dumb Pipe to the Net and we the users are responsible for our online actions. Thus we Should be the ones to Defend them and Oppose these types of orders in a court.
--
Every time Someone leaves Sympatico an Angel gets its wings.
|
|
