Copyright Troll Voltage Pictures Takes Aim at TekSavvy Brings Copyright Protection Racket Circus to Canada Tipped by fourboxers 
The law firm Dunlap, Grubb and Weaver (aka the U.S. Copyright Group) has perfected the " copyright-o-matic" approach to P2P lawsuits, sending out letters en masse to users they've identified as having traded copyrighted files, threatening to sue those users unless they settle for the rock-bottom initial price tag of $1,500. The goal is to both scare P2P users and create a new revenue stream, though the group has run into some legal hiccups for threatening and suing unidentified P2P users via often dubious evidence, and for doing so en masse. The law firm is behind the largest lawsuit of this kind ever courtesy of Voltage Pictures, who has tried to make a buck by mass suing U.S. users who shared their film The Hurt Locker on BitTorrent. Last year Voltage Pictures brought their mass lawsuit effort to Canada, and this week filed legal requests with Canadian ISP TekSavvy to obtain the names and contact information of 2,300 broadband subscribers. In a blog post, TekSavvy CEO Marc Gaudrault says this is the first such mass-lawsuit request they've seen, and the company is torn between wanting to adhere to law, while protecting customer information and keeping customers informed in a transparent manner. The company says they won't hand over subscriber information until they receive a court order, which is expected to come next Monday. "We have retained legal counsel to help us through this process to advise us on our rights and obligations as an ISP, so that we can apply our own judgement to the situation in an appropriate manner," said Gaudrault. "This case may well help determine how other such future cases are handled." Voltage Pictures is seeking individual damages of up to $10,000, despite the fact new Canadian copyright laws cap damages at $5,000. The studio continues to insist they're simply trying to recoup losses from piracy. "This is the first in a series of steps that will enable us to recover some of the losses we’ve incurred in the Canadian market," Voltage Pictures said in a press statement. "For a studio of our size, the losses we experience from piracy have a real effect. It means we hire less people and have less to invest in our films. The problem has become so widespread that we are compelled to act." Except Voltage has been widely criticized for operating what's essentially a protection racket (pay up or you won't get hurt) that targets users they know can't afford to adequately defend themselves. In the States the company has wiggled over and around the law after being repeatedly citing for over-reaching, working most closely with ISPs that are more likely to be cooperative (like Charter Communications), as an increasing number of U.S. ISPs have been standing up to Voltage's tactics. For Canadian consumers targeted by the suits without the means to contest them, The Law Society of Upper Canada provides a free lawyer referral service where you can at least obtain a thirty minute free consultation to advise you of our potential options. UpdateTekSavvy has posted a FAQ here, and there's also an ongoing discussion about this in our forum.
|
 | | Probably not just one This group is most likely going after more than just TK. Especially they even comment on here that they've spoke to others about it as well. | |
|  |  TilhasBBFormally Goden99Premium
join:2000-08-05
canada
2 edits | Re: Probably not just one The judge should not approve this.
IP does not mean PERSON.
It's like a speeding ticket, you need the driver of the car. Not the owner.
Specially internet, there are always multiple users. One IP, One router in a household. Also there are users that are minors. I'm not thinking 17 years old here I'm thinking 10!
Littlest pirate’s Winnie-the-Pooh laptop on the way home
Also, we have dynamics IPs.
Does Teksavvy keep a record of who had that IP a YEAR ago? Can that even be tracked?
Your Honor, The person who was sitting in that bus 154 Days ago at 11:32am winked at me...
Awesome Kudos for the free lawyer service! | |
| | | WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | Re: Probably not just one said by TilhasBB:It's like a speeding ticket, you need the driver of the car. Not the owner.
On the other hand, if your car was flagged as going through a toll both and not paying - then you as the car owner is responsible. | |
| | | | TilhasBBFormally Goden99Premium
join:2000-08-05
canada | Re: Probably not just one Your car is using the road. That's not an illegal activity that's a service. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·MegaPath
| actually comparing this to a speeding ticket is a moot point. Courts have upheld speeding tickets done by air and camera as civil matters in many countries. When done by camera still goes to the owner as it should here. If you have an unlocked router you should have it secured. | |
| | | | TilhasBBFormally Goden99Premium
join:2000-08-05
canada | Re: Probably not just one Yes but it's a different type of ticket. No Points and Doesn't effect your driving record. | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·MegaPath
| Re: Probably not just one still a ticket and still is on the owner. Point is just because it wasn't you doesn't mean you should get away with it. On your connection, yes you should have to pay. Your car is caught speeding, yes you should pay you are responsible for that car. Car has gone on toll roads and not paid- owner, again, gets the tickets.
And only certain areas have ruled that its a civil matter. many still say its criminal with points. | |
| | | | | | clone
join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN | Re: Probably not just one The point is, IP is not person. Why all the analogies, why don't you just come out and say you are defending the copyright trolls? | |
| | | | | | | TilhasBBFormally Goden99Premium
join:2000-08-05
canada | Re: Probably not just one said by clone:The point is, IP is not person. Why all the analogies, why don't you just come out and say you are defending the copyright trolls?
and his true colors appear.
I can't remember where I read this but it's good food for thought.
You teach your kids not to steal and it is wrong. They know it and understand it. Your kids teach you how to download movies, you thank them.
This shows that there is no source of education that explains digital copying is theft.
Back to my point. They are going after everything in mass, which is what I'm against. If you google around you will see they have charged 10 year olds to PRINTERS. Yes a printer. PRINTER!!, read that a 3rd time a PRINTER.
If you want to charge someone for theft you better be damn sure they did it.
Imagine you being a loyal citizen. Yes you "Clone" getting one of these letters? How PISSED would you be? You KNOW you didn't do it and they won't provide you with any evidence or their source. You are now faced with two choices, go to court and fight something you don't understand or pull your pants down and pay.
That is what I'm not happy about. They should be going after the people that are ripping the movies, stealing the dvd screeners and posting these videos. Not every other person they could possibly milk. | |
| | | | | | | | CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Probably not just one said by TilhasBB:I can't remember where I read this but it's good food for thought.
You teach your kids not to steal and it is wrong. They know it and understand it. Your kids teach you how to download movies, you thank them.
This shows that there is no source of education that explains digital copying is theft.
More food for thought. When you teach your kid not to steal, you don't have to teach him/her it is wrong to steal toys... then it's wrong to steal candy... then it's wrong to steal money... then it's wrong to steal... you teach them the principal of 'other people's stuff' and they understand it.
Now ask a kid if downloading a Justin Beiber song is 'stealing' when they can hear it for free all day on the radio, borrow their friend's CD and listen for free, go to the library and borrow the CD for free. You don't have to take the step to 'tell them it is ok', the very concept of it being stealing is illogical and counter-intuitive. They already know stealing the CD from the music store is stealing (which it is) but downloading the song? They realize that is grown-up fantasy BS to think of that as stealing.
The RIAA & MPAA spend tons of money on advertising specifically to try and convince these kids that it IS stealing so yes there is a 'source of education'. Kids do it anyway. Why, because these kids are bad? No, it's because the idea of it being stealing is so ridiculous that even a kid can see right through it. | |
| | | | | | | | |  J E F FWhatta Ya Think About Dat?Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
 ·Rogers Portable ..
·WIND Mobile
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
 ·magicjack.com
| Re: Probably not just one As I said before, back when we were kids, making taped mixes from 33's and 45's wasn't new. And it was even better CD's came out. I remember when we could rent CD's until they made it illegal to rent out CD's.
Anyway, no one sued anyone back in those days. No one got sued for taping off of TV, when the movie channels first came out.
But you're right, this type of intellectual property is hard to claim that it is stealing. I think most kids can relate to software (which, of course, back in our day, we copied floppies too) theft but things you can hear off of YouTube and satellite radio, etc,. it's hard to. Although I do buy all the music I listen to know, it wasn't the case when mp3 music first came out. Napster was the best and easiest way to get music back then...they should have adapted back then....
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein | |
|
| | | | | | | many countries of the world have ruled that the car/router can not get a ticket as it has to be written to a specific person. That also includes photo radar that must include a recognizable picture of the drivers face along with the license plate in the same image.
without undeniable proof of who was operating the unit(car or router or computer) that committed an infraction, the ticket/lawsuit can not be assigned to a person, resulting in it being thrown out due to lack of evidence of the 'actual perpetrator' of the crime. A corporation on the other hand would have a chain of command and evidence of orders to commit a crime and the offender and the Superior who ordered the crime to be committed would be prosecuted.
Governments will go around peoples Rights by saying that unless a claim was made to the police that someone stole your car/router or you point out who was borrowing your car/router, so the ticket to be written to a specific person.
Automated road tolls are a violation of the Charter due to the block of contesting the ticket in a court of law. this block is due to a large amount of tickets being written in error due to misread plates.
This copyright troll has no hard evidence other than IP address's and part files. Once they get the names to go along with these IP address's and send a pay up now or go to court letter, people can counter sue for extortion based on the letters 'pay now' aspect of the demand for 1/2 payment as good enough for the lawsuit to go away or be forced to spend a kajillion dollars in court.
Federal court based cases(even provincial court)...... No need to go to upper canada. Just claim being poor and you can't afford to go to the courts location, so the case then ends up in your local court with face to face contact or tele-court via the 'secure' internet. Single cases are expensive for their lawyers and they may close the case due to the expense of action. | |
| | | | | | Tong
join:2012-12-11
r3t 38x | There is a difference here between YOUR car and IP. You don't own your IP, your ISP does and you have no control what IP you get. | |
|
| | | | | And what if someone Hijacked your connection even if using a good security measure?? It does not take that much skill to crack a wifi password. | |
|
 El QuintronResident Mouth BreatherPremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2 | Kudos for mentionning the Lawyer Referal service. Like the title says...
I'm glad you mentionned it, mostly because people will be able to consult a lawyer before being bullied into settling.
EQ
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have | |
|  IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| Which is why I pay for my content I was in Best Buy a couple of weeks ago and I bought a new release CD from a popular punk rock group (not mentioning the name of the band to avoid the copyright trolls). I said to the clerk that I prefer to purchase my content and pirating music is like going into the store and shoplifting this CD that I am paying for. The clerk said he buys CDs and he has friends that question why he still buys CDs when you can download it for free. I said those artists don't work for free.
I also buy music on iTunes if I buy it by the song but if I want a whole album, I buy the CD and I rip it into my iTunes library for personal use only. | |
| | dra6o0n
join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON Reviews:
·ITalkBB
| Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by IowaCowboy:I was in Best Buy a couple of weeks ago and I bought a new release CD from a popular punk rock group (not mentioning the name of the band to avoid the copyright trolls). I said to the clerk that I prefer to purchase my content and pirating music is like going into the store and shoplifting this CD that I am paying for. The clerk said he buys CDs and he has friends that question why he still buys CDs when you can download it for free. I said those artists don't work for free.
I also buy music on iTunes if I buy it by the song but if I want a whole album, I buy the CD and I rip it into my iTunes library for personal use only.
When opportunity is there, people take it, that's why people pirate it, because of the sake of the opportunity.
A thief on the other hand isn't a pirate at times, because you are comparing digital downloads to theft, where something real is stolen.
Also, I still don't know why people still think and see things from your angle, supposedly your kinds should have all but vanished but it seems religion may have a role in keeping that mindset going. | |
| | |  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by dra6o0n:Also, I still don't know why people still think and see things from your angle, supposedly your kinds should have all but vanished but it seems religion may have a role in keeping that mindset going.
Because some people have morals(you don't have to be religious to have morals btw). And not everyone is part of the entitlement mindset where they think anything they want they should have, whether they can pay for it or not.
--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury.
Merry Christmas »goo.gl/Y2AEF | |
| | | | Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX | Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by Linklist:Because some people have morals(you don't have to be religious to have morals btw). And not everyone is part of the entitlement mindset where they think anything they want they should have, whether they can pay for it or not.
Except you are not really actually taking anything when you infringe copyright. Which just happens to make all the difference in the world compared to actual theft. | |
| | | | |  elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by Kamus:said by Linklist:Because some people have morals(you don't have to be religious to have morals btw). And not everyone is part of the entitlement mindset where they think anything they want they should have, whether they can pay for it or not.
Except you are not really actually taking anything when you infringe copyright. Which just happens to make all the difference in the world compared to actual theft. i have morals but after the MPAA and RIAA and most of the game publishers started treating paying customers like the pirates yea... things change
IM LOOKING AT YOU UBISOFT AND EA
explain to me why i should have MORE restrictions on the product i bought then the guy that pirated it ... | |
| | | | | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by elios:i have morals but after the MPAA and RIAA and most of the game publishers started treating paying customers like the pirates yea... things change
IM LOOKING AT YOU UBISOFT AND EA
explain to me why i should have MORE restrictions on the product i bought then the guy that pirated it ...
I agree that obnoxious restrictions put on purchased products is wrong. I won't buy those products.
--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury.
Merry Christmas »goo.gl/Y2AEF | |
| | | | | | | elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | Re: Which is why I pay for my content i think the MPAA and RIAA need to take a LONG HARD look at models like Steam
the Steam sales on games turn HUGE numbers
wile Steam is DRM its not bad as things good and may even add some value to things unlike the a lot of other things
i dont get the FBI warnings on movies that you cant skip >.>
or the endless trailers
i payed my 30bucks for the damn thing i want to watch the movie not your ads
yet if i go download it i can just watch the movie no BS | |
|
| | |  The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 | "Because some people have morals(you don't have to be religious to have morals btw)."
So if that were the case, whose "morals" are right? I mean after all, where is morality derived?
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010) | |
| | | | | | | Re: Which is why I pay for my content Morality is derived by the human experience, it evolves and shifts with the advancement of cohesive societies. Morality is built into our DNA through the long process of evolution in order to protect us from ourselves. Without innate morality the human race would have never survived this long.
Religion helps breach natural human morality by giving us a powerful reason to kill each other. Reasons built on imagination and superstition. | |
| | | | | |  NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by ReasonIs :Religion helps breach natural human morality by giving us a powerful reason to kill each other. Reasons built on imagination and superstition.
This part is just bullshit. Humans don't need religion as an excuse to kill one another.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
| | | | | | The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 | So when did we become "self-aware"? Also, how do you explain random murders that aren't pushed by religion? | |
|
| | | | said by dra6o0n:When opportunity is there, people take it, that's why people pirate it, because of the sake of the opportunity.
A thief on the other hand isn't a pirate at times, because you are comparing digital downloads to theft, where something real is stolen.
Also, I still don't know why people still think and see things from your angle, supposedly your kinds should have all but vanished but it seems religion may have a role in keeping that mindset going.
After reading that, I gotta chime in..
Citation please.
--
Splat | |
| | | | | So the work and money a studio, and the people employed there, put into making a show isn't real when you illegally download??
The work a band does in making the song and recording it isn't "real"??
Or did I misunderstand your post?? | |
| | | | elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by FloridaBoy:So the work and money a studio, and the people employed there, put into making a show isn't real when you illegally download??
The work a band does in making the song and recording it isn't "real"??
Or did I misunderstand your post??
they get paid regardless of how well any thing sells
only people "hurt" are MOSTLY the RIAA/MPAA and slight the artists but the at lest in the RIAA land artists make FAR FAR more from ticket sales then they will ever see in from CD sales 99% of that goes right in the RIAA pockets | |
| | | | | | | Re: Which is why I pay for my content Aren't they paid on an expected rate of return?? IF I get fewer and fewer sales, I doubt I am going to be paying you top dollar for your next release. | |
| | | | | | elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by FloridaBoy:Aren't they paid on an expected rate of return?? IF I get fewer and fewer sales, I doubt I am going to be paying you top dollar for your next release.
not how it works
they get a HUGE advance up front and then most of the sales go to paying that back and another other albums are already outlined in the contract up front
again artists make little from CD sales if any thing | |
|
| | | |
| | | said by IowaCowboy:I was in Best Buy a couple of weeks ago and I bought a new release CD from a popular punk rock group (not mentioning the name of the band to avoid the copyright trolls). I said to the clerk that I prefer to purchase my content and pirating music is like going into the store and shoplifting this CD that I am paying for. The clerk said he buys CDs and he has friends that question why he still buys CDs when you can download it for free. I said those artists don't work for free.
I also buy music on iTunes if I buy it by the song but if I want a whole album, I buy the CD and I rip it into my iTunes library for personal use only.
Which is fine, but what's your plan if you're falsely accused of downloading content? It can happen. Maybe the studio/law firm sends your ISP a request with an incorrect IP, an incorrect timestamp, or both. Or maybe someone at the ISP keys that info into their lookup system incorrectly, and out pops your name. How do you defend yourself when the lawyers come calling? Will you say that the file they want isn't on your computer? They'll say that you must have deleted it. In any case, you'll either have to settle or hire a lawyer and take your chances in court, either of which is going to cost you lots of money. However, given that the cost of losing in court can be astronomical, there's intense pressure to just settle, whether you did anything or not. And if you do go to court and win, you get nothing in return. Unless you can prove negligence on the other side's part, you get nothing, not even reimbursement for your legal fees, which can run into the tens of thousands of dollars. | |
| | | | | Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by ISurfTooMuch:said by IowaCowboy:I was in Best Buy a couple of weeks ago and I bought a new release CD from a popular punk rock group (not mentioning the name of the band to avoid the copyright trolls). I said to the clerk that I prefer to purchase my content and pirating music is like going into the store and shoplifting this CD that I am paying for. The clerk said he buys CDs and he has friends that question why he still buys CDs when you can download it for free. I said those artists don't work for free.
I also buy music on iTunes if I buy it by the song but if I want a whole album, I buy the CD and I rip it into my iTunes library for personal use only.
Which is fine, but what's your plan if you're falsely accused of downloading content? It can happen. Maybe the studio/law firm sends your ISP a request with an incorrect IP, an incorrect timestamp, or both. Or maybe someone at the ISP keys that info into their lookup system incorrectly, and out pops your name. How do you defend yourself when the lawyers come calling? Will you say that the file they want isn't on your computer? They'll say that you must have deleted it. In any case, you'll either have to settle or hire a lawyer and take your chances in court, either of which is going to cost you lots of money. However, given that the cost of losing in court can be astronomical, there's intense pressure to just settle, whether you did anything or not. And if you do go to court and win, you get nothing in return. Unless you can prove negligence on the other side's part, you get nothing, not even reimbursement for your legal fees, which can run into the tens of thousands of dollars. ^^2nd^^
How can you prove you didn't do something with out involving a lawyer for your defence? | |
| | | | | | Re: Which is why I pay for my content Precisely. You can't. In fact, the moment you receive the letter, the only prudent thing you can do is to hire a lawyer as soon as possible. Most likely, they'll fire off a letter saying that you, their client, denies downloading the file. That costs money. Then you wait to see if the other side goes away or pursues it further. If they in fact decide to sue, your lawyer is going to have to go through discovery to see what evidence the other side has. More money. They'll also have to plan your defense. Maybe you claim that the file was never on your hard drive. OK, it'll need to be sent out for forensic analysis, which you'll likely have to pay for. More money. Add in the cost of preparing motions for the court and other assorted paperwork. Even more money. And we haven't even gotten to trial yet.
Might as well settle. It'll be cheaper, and any decent attorney will tell you that. You may feel that you're in the right, to which I'll respond with something I've heard said by an attorney: "Can you afford to be right?" | |
| | | | | | | Re: Which is why I pay for my content You don't need a lawyer for a civil suit... Please checkout this article.. »www.scribd.com/doc/115443516/The···-Edition It was written with British copyright law in mind, so you'll have to adapt it slightly. | |
| | | | | | Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by Shweatyballs :You don't need a lawyer for a civil suit... There's an old saying...
•having a lawyer can cost you a lot
•not having a lawyer can cost you everything
At the very least do an initial consultation with a lawyer (1st 30 minutes free in Ontario »www.lsuc.on.ca/faq.aspx?id=2147486372 ) | |
| | | | | | | | I read through a good part of that book. Interesting and potentially useful, but how likely is it going to be that the average person is going to find it? Also, it's helpful in the initial stages, but if you're unlucky enough to get sued, you'd be foolish not to get a lawyer, and, at that point, the meter really starts running.
I worked at an organization that got hit with a couple of frivolous lawsuits. The things were utterly laughable, but, in both cases, they ended up settling for a few thousand dollars. Why? Because it would have cost far more to go to court, even if they ultimately won.
Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that settling is the right thing to do, but often it's the least financially-damaging thing to do. And that's the most disgusting part of the whole affair. | |
|
|  M22
@allstream.net | The problem isn't pay/not paying for content. The problem is being accused of not paying for content and not being able to prove that you are innocent. Any argument you could use can also be used by a person who downloaded the content. People have been falsely accused, and the evidence is complete load of corn flakes. | |
| | | | Except that downloading content =/= lost sales or shoplifting. That's a terrible analogy. I don't condone piracy but when articles come out titled things like movie revenues DOWN after MegaUpload bust, I feel that even though its illegal it still helps to get sales out for content legally, no matter your opinion on it. It's not going to stop no matter what they do, it's a futile effort. | |
| | | | I can get the same content legally. iTunes.com  Play.Google.com and at times Amazon.com You don't need the physical CD to be "legal". | |
| | KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | A good reason that if you are online at the moment and not on capped mobile services and want free music... Youtube.
At least then you cannot get nailed for downloading, At least for now in the US its not wrong to view a youtube video.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | | CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by IowaCowboy:I was in Best Buy a couple of weeks ago and I bought a new release CD from a popular punk rock group (not mentioning the name of the band to avoid the copyright trolls). I said to the clerk that I prefer to purchase my content and pirating music is like going into the store and shoplifting this CD that I am paying for.
No offense dude but making a statement like that to a Best Buy clerk as you pay for a CD sounds a little strange. I don't know if you are embellishing a little for the benefit of your post or if you really needed to morally justify the purchase to the clerk but if it is the latter, you may suffer from AS. | |
| | | IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by CXM_Splicer:said by IowaCowboy:I was in Best Buy a couple of weeks ago and I bought a new release CD from a popular punk rock group (not mentioning the name of the band to avoid the copyright trolls). I said to the clerk that I prefer to purchase my content and pirating music is like going into the store and shoplifting this CD that I am paying for.
No offense dude but making a statement like that to a Best Buy clerk as you pay for a CD sounds a little strange. I don't know if you are embellishing a little for the benefit of your post or if you really needed to morally justify the purchase to the clerk but if it is the latter, you may suffer from AS. If you say suffer from AS, it stands for Autism Spectrum Disorder and I have that condition. | |
| | | | CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Which is why I pay for my content said by IowaCowboy:If you say suffer from AS, it stands for Autism Spectrum Disorder and I have that condition.
Yes, sort of... I meant Aspergers Syndrome which is part of the spectrum. I recognize it because I work with two people who have it and the behavior patterns are familiar to me. | |
|
| | losses? more like trying to recoup losses from producing a crappy movie that didn't make enough money | |
|  dnoyeBFerrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI | what are they accused of? I don't understand what they are accused of. Why are they being sued? | |
| |  cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | Re: what are they accused of? said by dnoyeB:I don't understand what they are accused of. Why are they being sued?
Stealing movies. Clubbing baby seals. The approaching fiscal cliff. Republicans losing last November. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan. High gas prices. 9/11. Nixon...
Seriously though, copyright infringement or whatever the Canadian equivalent is. Eh. | |
| | dnoyeBFerrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI | And what are they actually doing? Are they making copies of the physical media? Are they streaming?
I just couldn't tell from the posting. | |
| | | | | Re: what are they accused of? The implication is that they "shared" the movie. Nothing stated explicitly, though.
Also, baby seals apparently were clubbed.
--
Jay: What the @#$% is the internet??? | |
|
| | Extortion Extortion. Our politicians are bought and paid for but whatever special interest group gives them bribes. | |
| WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | "The Plantiff believes..." So Voltage wants to sue the ISP to get more information.
"The Plaintiff believes that information obtained in discovery will lead to the identification of each Defendant's true name and permit the Plaintiff to amend this complaint to state the same."
But when the MPAA was caught downloading files, they claim an IP was not sufficient. | |
|  IllIlIlllIllEliteDataPremium
join:2003-07-06
Hampton Bays, NY
kudos:7 | Comment: "Voltage Pictures filed legal requests with Canadian ISP TekSavvy to obtain the names and contact information of 2,300 broadband subscribers."
2,300 users is a lot.
it surely cannot be expected that all 2,300 users were in fact participating in alleged copyright violations against Voltage Pictures.
There will be an error margin of an unknown amount but the fact remains and is clear, even if one person out of 2,300 has absolutely nothing to do with this copyright litigation proceeding from Voltage Pictures, there is a choice:
Pay up or hire a lawyer.
--
Suffolk County NY Police Feed - »www.scpdny.com
PS3 Gaming Feed - »www.livestream.com/elitedata | |
| | | But recouping lost a lost sale doesn't equate to $5000 Say I download a movie for personal viewing and then delete it. Lost sale = 1 copy. If using a torrent and I actually let it run to a 1:1 ratio, which means I shared 1 full copy of the said movie. So the studio is out 2 copies. let's say they on the brick and mortar store shelf at $25 a copy. At most the studio is out their wholesale portion of $50.00. So how can they claim $5000.00 in damages/loses? | |
| | | | Re: But recouping lost a lost sale doesn't equate to $5000 The other side to this is, if it wasn't free, would you have paid for it? Often not, so.. there is no loss of a sale - which is what bothers me with most piracy data, $x Billions lost in piracy, but we don't know how many of those people wouldn't have purchased it, even if it was the only way to get the item.
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel. | |
|
 JEDI
join:2005-04-11
Longueuil
kudos:1
·ELECTRONICBOX
·Videotron
| Proof? I don't do P2P, yet I find this really scary... what is even worse is that some people agree with this bully attitude.
Even if I don't do any P2P, I would not be surprised to be accused 1 day. Why? Because not only do mistakes happen, not only could my wifi router get hacked, but simply because they have no evidence, so how can you prove your innocence? I agree that a phone number, a street address or an IP address is NOT a person (and a dynamic IP address is definately NOT reliable to identify a person) but we are already way too far to talk about that. What is the evidence they even have against an IP address? A log? That they generated themselves? You have to be kidding, this is NO proof, anyone can generate a log, heck many of use can write a software to do so. Why would the log of a private company be a proof of anything? And why could they use it against someone? Isn't it way way way too covenient to generate yourself an evidence against someone that you are trying to get money from (bullying)?
That is amazing that some people agree with that. Don't complain when your IP address is targeted even if you never did any P2P! | |
| | | Fighting Piracy with piracy??!!?? What about the criminal acts involved in finding these ip's? IMO Voltage had to have committed 2300+ counts of piracy (TekSavvy alone) in order to acquire those IP's.
I don't see how fighting piracy with even worse piracy can hold up in court. Any way you look at it, they performed some sort of entrapment when they harvested IP's, and that should not be enforceable in a court of law. | |
|  phxmarkWhat Country Are We Living In?
join:2000-12-27
Glendale, AZ | Sue Netflix customers, too I am surprised that they didn't go after Netflix customers that rented this movie from Netflix and, heck,why not sue the people that bought the film, too, because they could have made copies and gave them to friends, family, co-workers, etc.
--
High speed is dangerous. Too many MP3s, not enough time. | |
| | NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: Sue Netflix customers, too said by phxmark:I am surprised that they didn't go after Netflix customers that rented this movie from Netflix and, heck,why not sue the people that bought the film, too, because they could have made copies and gave them to friends, family, co-workers, etc.
Or just put on a private exhibition in their living rooms. Those at this private screening would then not have needed to buy their own copies.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
·Wightman Telecom
| Here we go.... Retarded US copyright troll comes to Canada. Firstly how does this company know if the IP is spoofed or not? They don't. I have not used any torrent in almost two years since my last mint download. If my IP shows up in one of their lists. I will counter sue for $10 million for defamation.
I know I have spoofed IP's just out of pure fun. | |
| | | | What about Telus and Shaw? Why doesn't Voltage go after Telus and Shaw pirates because unlike in Ontario out west they actually have something approaching reasonable bandwidth caps. Conversely the people in Ontario barely have enough bandwidth to surf the web and read email. Voltage need to hit the reall abusers the ones with all the bandwidth to use. | |
| | | media Ill pay for music and dvds when they lift tarriffs off storage media so as far as im concerned i own it before i get it | |
| | | Ridiculous.. What if I rent a movie and invite an entire city of people to watch that movie all at once on my 500 foot ultra HD screen (I wish). This is technically not illegal. It is identical to a family renting or a group of friends renting a movie and watching it all together.. is Voltage Pictures going to sue my friends and family who came over and watched the movie that purchased for rent?
When a person downloads something, they are receiving an exact copy.. a clone of the original data. It is impossible to lose money when you are providing a digital copy. You can make an infinite amount..
To put it into perspective, what if Voltage wins this case and has people pay up and then Voltage releases another film and all these people who downloaded their first film choose to not download or buy Voltage Pictures' next film.. The outcome is the EXACT SAME!!!! Is Voltage Pictures going to sue these people again for not buying their next film? IT IS NOT A BAG OF CHIPS, OR A TV.. IT IS A VIRTUAL DIGITAL COPY!! THEY ARE NOT LOSING MONEY..
As a last statement. A good example would be someone who downloads a $2000 video editing program who would NEVER spend $2000 on software.. They simply would not edit if they couldn't get it for free. The software company should be thankful in fact because it is free advertising.. That person will not buy the software, so why not take advantage or at least forget that some people are getting it for free because when they go out with their friends the next day, chances are they will talk about the film and that's advertising.. FREE advertising.
Why don't these trolls look into increasing the experience at a movie theatre? so that people are excited and want to go see it at the theatre instead of downloading it for free.. I don't go to the theatre half as much as I used to because the prices are ridiculous.. $7 for popcorn? Are you kidding me? The bag the popcorn is in costs more than the actual popcorn for the theatre to make, so why is it $7!!! If a movie was $5 and popcorn was like $1 or $2 I would go ALL THE TIME and I would also spend WAY MORE money than I do now because it would be good value. It would be worth it. I go half as much because it costs me $20-30 every time. $10-$13 a ticket and then a pop and popcorn is another like $15..
Why is Voltage attacking Teksavvy? Why not Bell? Obviously it's safe to assume that some people using Bell's services are doing what people using Teksavvy's services are doing.. so why is Teksavvy only targeted? The owners of Voltage Pictures are a bunch of greedy rats. $1500 to settle? Are you kidding me?
What If I purchase a bluray disk of the film, but my bluray player breaks so I then download the film for free and watch it. Or What if I just wait it out until a friend buys it or rents it to watch to see it at their place, either way they are not LOSING MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | |
| | | | Re: Ridiculous.. Bell has had more lawsuits than Carter has liver pills. Part of the reason you pay so much for Bell services is the slew of lawyers they carry at the same time. Bell would stall Voltage indefinitely in court and bankrupt them. | |
| | | | | Re: Ridiculous.. Very true, Bell would just stall any 3rd party attempting to get their customer's data for IP addresses. I go through Bell, I'm not worried about any Copyright Trolls coming after me, they have to get a judge to agree to it first as well.
Teksavvy though has a chance to really do something here with these trolls to set the trend for other ISP's. Sounds like they're off to a positive start though, the CEO of Teksavvy is really standing behind his customers, he's gaining a lot of support too and, really, he's probably getting a lot of new customers in the future (after this nonsense has stopped).
Everyone, do yourself a favour and pony up $10 (or less) a month more and go through a reputable VPN. You won't have to worry about Copyright Trolls coming after you after that. | |
|
| | studio that makes junk movies - are they out of money? Looks like they are out of money. Haven't heard about this studio and their movies. Who is downloading this junk? | |
| | | Economic change This is not about morals but economics. I really don't see downloading a copy of a media item as theft, because there was no cost to the creator to provide me that copy. Unless I pay someone for that copy there can't be economic loss. Demand for things approach infinity when the price goes to zero. But the laws of supply and demand only apply if there is scarcity, limited supply. The digital world we live in and the ease of reproduction obliterates any scarcity. Media that is broadcast in digital form is almost effortless to copy.
There are many more pieces of media movies, songs, books, that I would not consume if they were legally free. Downloading media is no different than checking it out of the library. There's a lot of media there that I won't consume for free either.
You say the artists worked hard to create that media, well fine, but I didn't hire them. The fact that they can make living at all by shaking their ass on TV, screen, or stage is a marvel and they should enjoy it while it lasts. If musicians want to make money from their music they should not record it, but perform live for audiences who will pay (often a premium) to attend. There will always be a market for people who go to theaters to see movies, just as there are people who pay at theaters to see plays, concerts, and opera.
The recording industry is obsolete. No longer do we need specialized equipment and machines to produce physical objects to sell. It is the industry that needs to adapt, not the consumer to be punished for the natural evolution of progress. These lawsuits have little to do with artists, but are the death throes of those who control the physical recording industry. Greed is greed. True artists don't create art for the money.
The real supply and demand of media is one of Time. My time to consume media of any kind is extremely limited. There are dozens of films available to me right now legally through cable and Netflix that I just don't have time to watch. At least half of those will be disappointing and I'll regret having wasted my time. I'm often glad I did NOT pay for the experience. Netflix does a good job of figuring out what I might like (better than Apple) and I would pay a premium to someone who could do that accurately for all media.
Of those things that I download, If I like something I'll buy it. My reasoning is that mediocre media is worth less than my time to consume it, therefore I shouldn't pay for it. But media that actually informs me or pleases me, enriches my life and should be compensated. Most of the junk produced is often not worth the efforts of production.
My 2 cents, Sorry for the long post. | |
| | | byebye Teksavvy Regardless if my IP was affected or not if Teksavvy were forced to hand over the customer information on the those IP I will be leaving Teksavvy... don’t want to be next. Once been accused is a loss-loss whether is to settle or court. Unless Teksavvy step up to help the customer with joint defense the case against the SOB | |
| | | | | RickStepPremium
join:2002-11-25
Hamilton, ON
kudos:1 | Re: byebye Teksavvy said by J E F F:If they're told they have to do it due to court order, they have no choice. They are going after TS . . . If Teksavvy tuns over the requested information from the first court appearance, Teksavvy may well be history.
The SCC (Supreme Court of Canada) is many years away and Teksavvy needs to fight this as far as they can. While not cheap, it may be better than locking the doors.
Other small providers may be next if Teksavvy loses, and may be willing to contribute to Telsavvy's costs.
Rick | |
|
| |
|
|
