dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
8
share rss forum feed

bullwinkle

join:2011-03-19
Nepean, ON
reply to Brandon411

Re: Teksavvy Voltage motion - Looking for some advice

said by Brandon411 :

Does anyone actually think it's the responsibility of the accused to show up with a lawyer to oppose this initial motion??

Note - I am not a lawyer, so take this with a non-lawyerly grain of salt.

If the accused wants to be 100% assured that the privacy issues are raised in court in reference to the motion for disclosure, then, yes, that individual should make sure that he/she has appropriate legal representation at the hearing, who can oppose the motion on some or all of the grounds that have already been raised here and elsewhere. An ISP may choose to oppose on the same grounds - or not - depending on the legal advice they receive. Third parties such as CIPPIC may seek to intervene in order to raise the same issues, but their participation is not an entitlement, and they might not be allowed to participate.

The subject of such a disclosure motion, however, is absolutely entitled to be represented, so again, the only way for the subject of a disclosure motion to guarantee that someone will be able to argue about the privacy implications would be to arrange specific representation themselves.

said by Brandon411 :

This is the JOB of the ISP!

Well, no. The job of the ISP is to fulfill the terms of the contracts they have with their customers. They are not obligated to advocate on your behalf in court. Whether they choose to do so in specific circumstances will be based on the legal advice that they receive with respect to risks, probabilities, potential liabilities, and their own best interests as a corporate entity.

Let's remember, too, that TekSavvy did not simply hand over information to Voltage. They requested that the court postpone the motion hearing to allow enough time to notify those affected - which in turn has allowed CIPPIC to step forward, and given those affected the chance to prepare as they see fit. I don't think that TekSavvy is getting enough credit for that good act.


TraderOne

@teksavvy.com
said by [bquote=Brandon411 :

Let's remember, too, that TekSavvy did not simply hand over information to Voltage. They requested that the court postpone the motion hearing to allow enough time to notify those affected - which in turn has allowed CIPPIC to step forward, and given those affected the chance to prepare as they see fit. I don't think that TekSavvy is getting enough credit for that good act.

I would like to ask what the difference between 1 and 2 is?

1. I will notify you, then hand over your information to a jerk

2. I will hand over your information to a jerk

Frankly, I don't see a difference. At the end, Teksavvy will happily hand over your private information to a third party and doesn't give a sh*t about what that will put its customers into.

Here comes two questions.

1. Why does Teksavvy gather my private information and keep it for 90 days without any good reasons?

2. Why does Teksavvy refuse to take action in court to fulfill his obligation of protecting customer's privacy? Don't tell me notifying its customers by saying "I will give you up" and roll over is a good act of protecting customers' privacy.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

1 recommendation

said by TraderOne :

said by [bquote=Brandon411 :

Let's remember, too, that TekSavvy did not simply hand over information to Voltage. They requested that the court postpone the motion hearing to allow enough time to notify those affected - which in turn has allowed CIPPIC to step forward, and given those affected the chance to prepare as they see fit. I don't think that TekSavvy is getting enough credit for that good act.

I would like to ask what the difference between 1 and 2 is?

1. I will notify you, then hand over your information to a jerk

2. I will hand over your information to a jerk

Frankly, I don't see a difference. At the end, Teksavvy will happily hand over your private information to a third party and doesn't give a sh*t about what that will put its customers into.

Here comes two questions.

1. Why does Teksavvy gather my private information and keep it for 90 days without any good reasons?

2. Why does Teksavvy refuse to take action in court to fulfill his obligation of protecting customer's privacy? Don't tell me notifying its customers by saying "I will give you up" and roll over is a good act of protecting customers' privacy.

The difference is that with 1, you have the option of getting yourself a lawyer first to fight the court order that would reveal your information. With the 2nd, I don't believe you get time to find a lawyer and fight the court order before your information has to be legally handed over under penalty from the courts.

1.
The 'private' information that Voltage wants, is essentially, your billing information (minus your actual credit card numbers, etc) which TSI needs to keep on file as long as you're a customer.. They need to know name, address, phone numbers, etc. ie, Contact info & address of service.

I think the only thing they keep 90 days, is the IP address history. I'm sorry, unlike some others, I do believe child porn investigations are a good reason to keep IP history for 90 days. That kind of scum deserve to be locked in a hole.

But the 90 days is also for billing discrepancies to be dealt with, as well as dealing with those DMC charges Bell doesn't bother charging TSI immediately for, and sometimes bills DMC charges for no actual rollout. Those need to be fought, and they need to have supporting info.

2.
The thing is, that Teksavvy didn't have to inform customers about the court order until AFTER it was already issued. They also didn't have to fight the court order - a few other ISPs in November didn't.

TSI fought for extension of the court order in order to inform their customers, and buy people time to get lawyers and make a decision as to what to do.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


John Doe 187

@5.135.78.x
reply to TraderOne
I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
said by John Doe 187 :

I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.

Bell, Cogeco & Videotron didn't fight a court order from Voltage in Sept 2011 back when they could have easily argued privacy rights & evidence issues based on the 2004 decision.

Other TPIA providers decided not to fight November 2012. Before this 'neutral' requirement in the act which indemnifies them from liability from their customers' downloading. It wasn't in place til end of Nov I think? They wouldn't have been held liable for their customer's downloading practices no matter what.

As for now, they have to be 'neutral' whatever the hell that is, with no described standard for what 'neutral' is, and what ISPs can or can't do while remaining immune from liability.

Other ISPs have larger windows in which they keep IP address info..

I'm just curious who you plan on going with.. (No, I'm not being sarcastic.. I'm curious as to who you think will do better than Teksavvy in protecting your privacy).
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5
I think the trolls' idea of an isp is any open wifi router it can leech from. Cause as far as I know there isn't a single ISP in Canada that does what that troll wants.


TraderOne

@teksavvy.com
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

The difference is that with 1, you have the option of getting yourself a lawyer first to fight the court order that would reveal your information. With the 2nd, I don't believe you get time to find a lawyer and fight the court order before your information has to be legally handed over under penalty from the courts.

What I am saying is that notifying its customer or not makes no difference on Teksavvy's stance on protecting its customers' privacy. At the end, Teksavvy will happily hand over its customers' private information. Teksavvy does not give a sh*t about protecting its customers' privacy.

said by resa1983:

1.
The 'private' information that Voltage wants, is essentially, your billing information (minus your actual credit card numbers, etc) which TSI needs to keep on file as long as you're a customer.. They need to know name, address, phone numbers, etc. ie, Contact info & address of service.

I think the only thing they keep 90 days, is the IP address history. I'm sorry, unlike some others, I do believe child porn investigations are a good reason to keep IP history for 90 days. That kind of scum deserve to be locked in a hole.

But the 90 days is also for billing discrepancies to be dealt with, as well as dealing with those DMC charges Bell doesn't bother charging TSI immediately for, and sometimes bills DMC charges for no actual rollout. Those need to be fought, and they need to have supporting info.

I consider the linking between IP address and my personal identification as my private information. It tells where i go in the internet. That is what happens in the Voltage's troll. I don't mean I will do bad thing in the internet. It is just that I want to browse the web freely without being tracked by some unknown third party. So, Please don't tell me something like "if you do nothing wrong, you don't have to be scared". If you do believe "if you do nothing wrong, you don't have to be scared", I will take a camera and follow you all around and tell you " if you do nothing wrong, you don't have to be scared".

I don't think child porn investigation is a good reason to keep a 90 days log. A 2 days log can help child porn investigation as well. Child porn investigation is important. Protecting people's privacy is also important. I don't see how child porn investigation over rules privacy protection.

If Teksavvy has a business need to keep 90 days log. I have no problem with that as long as Teksavvy guards this log of private information as hard as it can. But, Notifying its customers by saying "We will hand over your private information. Sorry, you are on your own" is not a good way of showing how much Teksavvy values their customers' privacy. It just simply shows Teksavvy does not care about its customers' privacy at all.


John Doe 187

@5.135.78.x
reply to resa1983
As far as which provider I will be switching to I have yet to decide and need some time to do some research. I just don't want to cancel my internet right now as I need to be up to date and is less on the priority list but I will be cancelling once more information comes out.


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

said by John Doe 187 :

I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.

Bell, Cogeco & Videotron didn't fight a court order from Voltage in Sept 2011 back when they could have easily argued privacy rights & evidence issues based on the 2004 decision.

Other TPIA providers decided not to fight November 2012. Before this 'neutral' requirement in the act which indemnifies them from liability from their customers' downloading. It wasn't in place til end of Nov I think? They wouldn't have been held liable for their customer's downloading practices no matter what.

As for now, they have to be 'neutral' whatever the hell that is, with no described standard for what 'neutral' is, and what ISPs can or can't do while remaining immune from liability.

Other ISPs have larger windows in which they keep IP address info..

I'm just curious who you plan on going with.. (No, I'm not being sarcastic.. I'm curious as to who you think will do better than Teksavvy in protecting your privacy).

Comparing in that context is a far cry. Just because the big 3 do or don't do something doesn't mean it's ok for TSI to do or not to do something.

Isn't TSI different? I'm not even arguing about privacy or IP issues, just your argument. Quit comparing TSI to them. Everyone should quit comparing Teksavvy to anyone. They're not comparable, period.

If one user chooses to leave, doesn't mean we all should debate what one or the other did and didn't do. This is about Teksavvy. It really doesn't matter who they go with, it's not them Voltage is after right now, and Teksavvy may be Voltages go to ISP for for some time to come.


TraderOne

@teksavvy.com
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

2.
The thing is, that Teksavvy didn't have to inform customers about the court order until AFTER it was already issued. They also didn't have to fight the court order - a few other ISPs in November didn't.

TSI fought for extension of the court order in order to inform their customers, and buy people time to get lawyers and make a decision as to what to do.

I expect everybody to do their job and fulfill their own obligations. There are three parties involved in the Voltage't troll, Voltage, Teksavvy, Teksavvy's customers.

For Voltage, its job is to scare people to get its dirty money. Its obligation is to die miserably because it really creates a bad reputation for itself.

For Teksavvy's customers, their obligation is to browse the web wisely. Their job is to find legal assistance to protect themselves and not to expect somebody else to do it for themselves when sh*t litigation comes up .

For Teksavvy, its job is to provide its customer's with supreme internet service. Their obligation is to protect its customers privacy when sh*t litigation comes up.

Everyone needs to do their own work and fulfill their obligation. Customers will hire lawyers to fight in the court does not mean it is OK for Teksavvy to lay back and hand over its customers' private information without a fight ( Notifying its customers is not a fight).

Sure, Teksavvy does not need to inform customers about the court order before it is issued. Sure, a few ISPs in Canada just hand over their customers information without a blink of eyes. But, that does not mean Teksavvy is doing a good job by rolling over after informing its customers. A piece of sh*t stinks less in a pile of sh*t does not make it a diamond. It is still a piece of sh*t.


John Doe 187

@5.135.78.x
reply to Tx
I agree to this. I mean you cave the first time they will come for seconds, thirds, etc... Voltage and company are hungry to recoup revenue they would have never made in the first place and exploiting the court system to do so. It’s sad but the old dollar bill rules.

That alone is enough reason for me to leave TSI. Weather there is a better ISP out there is not relevant but I choose to believe something else must be better. I choose TSI because they fought for bandwidth and now there is another fight coming and they unwilling to go the extra mile so I like them can make a decision too.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to Tx
said by Tx:

Comparing in that context is a far cry. Just because the big 3 do or don't do something doesn't mean it's ok for TSI to do or not to do something.

Isn't TSI different? I'm not even arguing about privacy or IP issues, just your argument. Quit comparing TSI to them. Everyone should quit comparing Teksavvy to anyone. They're not comparable, period.

If one user chooses to leave, doesn't mean we all should debate what one or the other did and didn't do. This is about Teksavvy. It really doesn't matter who they go with, it's not them Voltage is after right now, and Teksavvy may be Voltages go to ISP for for some time to come.

And what about my comparison of the TPIA providers who didn't fight back in Nov 2012?
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
said by resa1983:

said by Tx:

Comparing in that context is a far cry. Just because the big 3 do or don't do something doesn't mean it's ok for TSI to do or not to do something.

Isn't TSI different? I'm not even arguing about privacy or IP issues, just your argument. Quit comparing TSI to them. Everyone should quit comparing Teksavvy to anyone. They're not comparable, period.

If one user chooses to leave, doesn't mean we all should debate what one or the other did and didn't do. This is about Teksavvy. It really doesn't matter who they go with, it's not them Voltage is after right now, and Teksavvy may be Voltages go to ISP for for some time to come.

And what about my comparison of the TPIA providers who didn't fight back in Nov 2012?

Same rules apply. Marc has time and time again said Teksavvy is not them. They pride themselves for being a different, better option.

Compare bell, rogers, telus all you like, they're in eachothers pockets... but TSI is a whole new ball game. They are absolutely different and moves they make every year will define them 10 years from now.

JohnDoe187

join:2013-01-04
reply to Tx
I agree. I signed up with TSI because they claimed to be different and care about their customers. This lack of action in my opinion does not support their claims.

Maybe doing nothing won't hurt TSI and maybe it will but for myself I rather go with another ISP. Which ISP that will be is unknown and I don’t have the time to worry about now. But I do know is I am not staying with them after Jan 14th or when I get this matter dealt with. Maybe I won't be sheltered by the new ISP, maybe I will, I am not sure, but what I do know is if the trolls know you are willing to give up your customers… be prepared for them to come back again and again... I for one don't want to stick around for the second dinner!

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to bullwinkle
said by bullwinkle:

said by Brandon411 :

Does anyone actually think it's the responsibility of the accused to show up with a lawyer to oppose this initial motion??

Note - I am not a lawyer, so take this with a non-lawyerly grain of salt.

If the accused wants to be 100% assured that the privacy issues are raised in court in reference to the motion for disclosure, then, yes, that individual should make sure that he/she has appropriate legal representation at the hearing, who can oppose the motion on some or all of the grounds that have already been raised here and elsewhere. An ISP may choose to oppose on the same grounds - or not - depending on the legal advice they receive. Third parties such as CIPPIC may seek to intervene in order to raise the same issues, but their participation is not an entitlement, and they might not be allowed to participate.

The subject of such a disclosure motion, however, is absolutely entitled to be represented, so again, the only way for the subject of a disclosure motion to guarantee that someone will be able to argue about the privacy implications would be to arrange specific representation themselves.

said by Brandon411 :

This is the JOB of the ISP!

Well, no. The job of the ISP is to fulfill the terms of the contracts they have with their customers. They are not obligated to advocate on your behalf in court. Whether they choose to do so in specific circumstances will be based on the legal advice that they receive with respect to risks, probabilities, potential liabilities, and their own best interests as a corporate entity.

Let's remember, too, that TekSavvy did not simply hand over information to Voltage. They requested that the court postpone the motion hearing to allow enough time to notify those affected - which in turn has allowed CIPPIC to step forward, and given those affected the chance to prepare as they see fit. I don't think that TekSavvy is getting enough credit for that good act.

your right and wrong
WHILE it snot THERE JOB, there are laws and moral obligations of privacy and truth and justice ....one simply does not enter a contract with anyone and one half does so on bad faith that they will do as they wish....like ive said if they dont want this to start costing them a lot of time and effort then they should stand up against it and do so on moral and legal grounds that there can be no way anyone can show or tell me just by seeing a list of ip addresses that commercial infringement is taking place ...i can draw that up and fake bit torrent client looks ....the term reasonable doubt plays in all courts although it is less strict in civil courts. IF you want to violate my privacy and aid and abet in harassing and slandering and defaming my or anyones good name in an incorrect filing putting myself or others in with real pirating and real counterfietors so they can harrass and extort the weak minded and prey on those that have no clue to there rights... .....then get ready for a class action lawsuit to come your way.
TSI has made it clear in many postings around here that they claim to be standing on side of there users and just happens they are customers, and while i dont sign a contract there is one technically by law.

i ought to make a video on encryption use and post it here and have teksavvy post it on there website and send it to every customer they have.

To those that still torrent ...i say to you this the days of being at a large site with tons of people are over...too much risk for you and its too hard to keep those places safe and most admins of such know it and don't care or when heat gets turned up run off leaving everyone else buggered....

and even as you claim TSI had time to warn people and not make any deals with voltage. NO CIVIL case is automatically heard and this one took a month to get to that hearing. they could have spilled hte beans on it regardless and used the privacy act as a shield....then they could have said when your lawyer learns what commerical and non commerical is come back and bother people ....

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

odd cant quote you
all ihav eto say is your wrong more or less
cause after you get my information using a false filing we file a class action countersuit that says your wrongly filed for commerical infringment with no proof and then ask for an injunction to stop any and all monies that you gain until the countersuit can be heard.

that buys a lot of time and EVERY person has the right to an attorney after this and if you lawyer up 2300 people and get each and everyone of them to hear those charges and then do the countersuit in the proper class action fashion it cna get heard a lot quicker and thus it will have been heard before that main case and then there gonna have problems.

not a lawyer just played a tactical simulation games..lol

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

said by John Doe 187 :

I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.

Bell, Cogeco & Videotron didn't fight a court order from Voltage in Sept 2011 back when they could have easily argued privacy rights & evidence issues based on the 2004 decision.

Other TPIA providers decided not to fight November 2012. Before this 'neutral' requirement in the act which indemnifies them from liability from their customers' downloading. It wasn't in place til end of Nov I think? They wouldn't have been held liable for their customer's downloading practices no matter what.

As for now, they have to be 'neutral' whatever the hell that is, with no described standard for what 'neutral' is, and what ISPs can or can't do while remaining immune from liability.

Other ISPs have larger windows in which they keep IP address info..

I'm just curious who you plan on going with.. (No, I'm not being sarcastic.. I'm curious as to who you think will do better than Teksavvy in protecting your privacy).

and all three own and produce movies and tv...gee wonder why, cause then they can come after you easier for there stuff.
thats why its bias to have an isp with iptv or owning cable or satallite tv/movies.

funny0

join:2010-12-22
reply to resa1983
so far no one is fighting back really if cippic doesn't get intervene status its being handed to voltage.

enjoy


Jeffer71

join:2008-09-13
Carrying Place, ON
Reviews:
·Acanac
reply to John Doe 187
said by John Doe 187 :

I agree with this. I believe the service provider should be doing something to protect their customer's interest along with their own. If they are unwilling to question such requests now how many more requests will be made to them in the future? It just seems this fight to set some precedence is worthwhile and something Teksavvy should be seeking to do.

After January 14 I will be cancelling my internet with Teksavvy and subscribing with someone else who has my best interest in mind if nothing happens. Let’s see what my service provider is willing to do for my interest right instead of the other way around.

I don't put faith in anyone but myself when it comes to protecting my privacy online.

Anyone that expects it from their ISP is delusional and ignorant.

Take the bull by the horn and protect yourselves.

It's not like the internet and online security issues are virgin territory, this shit has been going on for years.


dillyhammer
START me up
Premium
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..
reply to resa1983
said by resa1983:

I'm curious as to who you think will do better than Teksavvy in protecting your privacy

If people stand around and do nothing, how the hell are ISPs going to get the message the handing off our private information is a bad thing?

What people need to do is make this experience as painful as possible, so that any ISP considering giving up the info at the drop of a hat thinks twice.

Let's face it. This was a risk assessment exercise by TSI. They simply weighed the possible outcomes of fighting versus rolling over, and decided that rolling over was less risk.

We as a community need to change that perception.

The message we need to send is, "if you roll over, it will cost you, and big time".

There needs to be a backlash for rolling over like this. It needs to be swift, and extremely painful. Once it goes public that TSI released the info I think we're going to see some of that.

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


dontbackdown

@nltelcom.com
What we are witnessing is the death of an ISP. Inside of 5 years Teksavvy will be gone if they roll over. The whole business model was about protecting the customer and they will have effectively thrown it out the window. If they fight the business will grow, if they don't it will die. Everybody stuck with Teksavvy through thick and thin because of this.

bullwinkle

join:2011-03-19
Nepean, ON
said by dontbackdown :

The whole business model was about protecting the customer and they will have effectively thrown it out the window. If they fight the business will grow, if they don't it will die. Everybody stuck with Teksavvy through thick and thin because of this.

I have to disagree with you. As far as I can tell, it's more that their business model was about providing better - or at least, differentiated - value to customers. Their prior battles with the incumbents and the regulators were about sustaining their ability to provide their current and potential consumers as an aggregate with those other choices. That's very different from your expectation that they should defend individual customers who may have been implicated in court proceedings.

If your choice of ISP does depend on having that expectation met, then, yeah, you should look elsewhere for service.


hm

@videotron.ca
said by bullwinkle:

said by dontbackdown :

The whole business model was about protecting the customer and they will have effectively thrown it out the window. If they fight the business will grow, if they don't it will die. Everybody stuck with Teksavvy through thick and thin because of this.

I have to disagree with you.

Some lawyers are saying the same thing as "dontbackdown". Howard Knopff i one of them. See, »www.excesscopyright.blogspot.ca/···-in.html
... Will feisty, progressive Teksavvy, the ISP that has built its reputation on being customer-friendly, actually stand up and fight for its customers’ “privacy” without taking sides on “piracy”

Fight or flight.

If teksavvy just lets cippic handle it w/o involving themselves, they are going to lose face with a lot of people.

However my prediction is:
Teksavvy is loading the dice. That is, they are siding with and trying to let cippic handle it and if they fail to get intervention status then TSI will come out swinging. They are just leaving doors open. Or so I am hoping.

cynic10

join:2011-02-05
quote:
However my prediction is:Teksavvy is loading the dice. That is, they are siding with and trying to let cippic handle it and if they fail to get intervention status then TSI will come out swinging.[i/] They are just leaving doors open. Or so I am hoping.

I truly hope you're right about this last part but I don't have much faith. Already looking for new ISP in my area, Start.ca seems to be the next to go to.

And this is what happens when you give copyright trolls an inch....another one bites the dust.

»torrentfreak.com/music-biz-wants···-130105/
What started out with Eircom agreeing to have The Pirate Bay blocked could now potentially lead to a few other Irish ISPs having to follow suit.


dontbackdown

@start.ca
reply to bullwinkle
They should defend all customer not individual ones. Last I checked this was not the problem of one individual but that of thousands. Do you even have any idea what you are defending? Lol

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to hm
said by hm :

However my prediction is:
Teksavvy is loading the dice. That is, they are siding with and trying to let cippic handle it and if they fail to get intervention status then TSI will come out swinging. They are just leaving doors open. Or so I am hoping.

I'm really hoping this is the case as well, especially since TSI has serious business concerns here. From poaching by other ISPs (I'm sure P2P users are cash cows for the likes of Bhell and Robbers), detriment to their short term reputation which will affect referrals and retention rates, and long term reputation as this will be the case everyone remembers. People won't remember the 20-30 person suits but they will remember the first mass lawsuit that set the standard of behaviour for other ISPs to follow.

JohnDoe187

join:2013-01-04
Does anyone know if CIPPIC has been given intervener status or when that would be given or denied?

Tong

join:2012-12-11
r3t 38x
We will find out on Jan 14th. Right now, they don't.

abcjak

join:2012-12-18
reply to funny0

said by funny0 See Profile
As for now, they have to be 'neutral' whatever the hell that is, with no described standard for what 'neutral' is, and what ISPs can or can't do while remaining immune from liability.

Other ISPs have larger windows in which they keep IP address info..

:

Hmmm.....all this talk of remaining "neutral" finally clicked button in my memory. How many of you were online roughly 15-20yrs ago? My recall is sketchy in the details but it concerned newsfeeds and NNTP and local storage of all kinds of things which normally would be illegal. If i remember right, in the end, it was decided that it was not the ISP/school/news-server-owners job to analyze and police everything that was going on with them and that they can turn a blind eye and remain neutral to what's going on with them. ...this was here, I was in univeristy at the time but the decision later trickled to Rogers and all the others. This sounds very similar to the position taken by the australian ISP that recently walked away from that movie company saying it's not their job to watch users the way the company wanted them to.


InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to dillyhammer
said by dillyhammer:

If people stand around and do nothing, how the hell are ISPs going to get the message the handing off our private information is a bad thing?

What people need to do is make this experience as painful as possible, so that any ISP considering giving up the info at the drop of a hat thinks twice.

If the ISP gets served a court order, they have to comply or get charged with contempt for the court which could have some rather nasty consequence for the company... imagine a search warrant where the police brings down the routers and servers for investigation because the ISP refuses to cooperate. If the search discovers evidence that the ISP deleted records after they were made aware of the search warrant, the ISP and its employees may also get charged with destruction of evidence.

So, unless the ISP's owners and employees are willing to get criminally charged and/or have their business shut down for an undetermined period of time while their offices and installations are being stormed by investigators, there isn't much they can legally do to object to court orders once they have been issued.