posted by
mattie_p
on Saturday February 22 2014, @08:07AM
from the not-that-different-from-america dept.
from the not-that-different-from-america dept.
Absinth writes:
"Canadians who illegally download music, movies and other copyright material may no longer be able to hide from potential lawsuits.
In a groundbreaking decision released Thursday by Canada's Federal Court, the Internet service provider TekSavvy Solutions was ordered to release to Voltage Pictures LLC the names and addresses of more than 2,000 Internet users suspected of pirating movies. Voltage is a Hollywood production company that has made films including 'The Hurt Locker,' which won six Oscars, and the upcoming 'American Heist.'"
[Ed. Note] Apparently this is a dupe.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2014, @08:13AM
http://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=14/02/21/22
come on. it's not even off the first page yet.
(Score: 1) by drgibbon on Saturday February 22 2014, @08:39AM
The resemblance to /. is uncanny isn't it?
Certified Soylent Fresh!
(Score: 4, Funny) by bd on Saturday February 22 2014, @09:06AM
Yeah, first dupe!
Now if people start acting smug about low uid's
I will finally be able to call this place home!
(Score: 5, Informative) by mattie_p on Saturday February 22 2014, @09:19AM
Get off my lawn, n00b! Hey, editor here. Yeah, I messed up. It has been a busy day. First I had like 3 cups of coffee. Then I was playing our idle rpg game all day on #irpg at our IRC server, irc.sylnt.us. Then I was trolling noobs.
The fact is, with a completely different title I didn't recognize it. Congratulations to those who identified this error and pointed it out to us. Thanks for doing so, and thanks for reading. ~mattie_p
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bd on Saturday February 22 2014, @10:22AM
With a uid as low as that, you have been here long enough to know that you need at least 4 more cups of coffee.
As an aside, I am utterly enjoying this site, it feels just like that other site did 14 years ago. Thanks!
(Score: 1) by Foobar Bazbot on Saturday February 22 2014, @09:44PM
It's 2014; surely you can afford a color monitor.
(Score: 5, Funny) by NCommander on Saturday February 22 2014, @01:33PM
Pfft, 2 digit UIDs are so just so new-school
Still always moving
(Score: 1) by Foobar Bazbot on Saturday February 22 2014, @06:11PM
Poor form, mattie_p!
You know we're supposed to wait till a 3-digit UID pops up thinking he's something special, then let loose, but you just had to jump the gun...
(Score: 5, Funny) by Lagg on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:28PM
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by combatserver on Saturday February 22 2014, @08:56AM
This submission was accepted to the main page for a reason--Take a look at the following post, and it will all make sense.
http://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=213&cid=460 1 [soylentnews.org]
mattie-p, pure awesome.
Absinth, Nailed it.
I hope I can change this later...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2014, @09:15AM
So to be clear, he:
(Score: 3, Insightful) by combatserver on Saturday February 22 2014, @09:33AM
1. submitted an article--yes
2. was disappointed that somebody else got their submission got accepted over his--yes
3. submitted the same article again but better--yes
4. didn't leave soylentnews-- yes
5. learned a few things-- yes
6. didn't QUIT-- yes
SoylentNews is NOT Slashdot. The fact that this submission made it to the main page indicates--to me--that SoylentNews is indeed made for people, by people.
I hope I can change this later...
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2014, @09:44AM
True, though he could have done 4-6 without 3. There is other news out there and I'd like him to continue submitting it, especially stuff he doesn't already know has been posted.
Maybe this is why the other place had so many dupes—Somebody new would show up and learned a few things.
(Score: 3, Funny) by wjwlsn on Saturday February 22 2014, @02:56PM
1. Submit dupe article
2. Revise article slightly after original isn't accepted
3. Resubmit when editor is hopped up on caffeine, IRC, and noobtrolling
4. ???
5. Profit!
I am a traveler of both time and space. Duh.
(Score: 1) by Absinth on Monday February 24 2014, @08:03PM
Definetely !
Although I do not wish to take credit for 3 since there is no way to (currently) modify a submission [soylentnews.org]. I did not edit/resubmit/sacrifice a goat in order to have the story pulished; the news was already out and I guess that's more important IMO.
Checking out a reasonable timespan in the submissions feed or at least a few pages past the front before posting could help avoiding dupes after the original story is out. An easier access to the submissions [soylentnews.org] could also be helpful to potential posters.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2014, @01:11PM
So much for this being the anti-slashdot. I really had hopes. Fucking dupes, are you kidding me?
It's probably for the best. Looking at this thread alone, this site is already devolving into a "we only talk to each other" site where outsiders aren't welcome.
(Score: 2, Funny) by mrclisdue on Saturday February 22 2014, @02:58PM
Dice, baby, is that you?
cheers,
(Score: 5, Informative) by Nerdfest on Saturday February 22 2014, @03:21PM
It was nice to see TekSavvy stand up for their customers (full disclosure: I'm one of them, and very happy). When the studios came asking for subscriber info, everyone else just handed it over. TekSavvy said show us a court order. From what I understand, even after they had the court order and their lawyers said they should comply, they stood up in court and said that their customers had not had enough time to respond, and the court agreed.
Now, they must hand over the information, but just name and address data, and the court must approve any communications that go to these people so they don't get trolled with wild threat letters. On top of that, the maximum fine is $5000, so it makes abuse of the process much less profitable than it is elsewhere. Overall, not a bad outcome.
If you happen to live in an area covered by TekSavvy, think about switching to them. Beyond their doing the right thing here, they're very good and very well priced, generally quite a lot cheaper than the big guys in the market.
(Score: 5, Informative) by mrclisdue on Saturday February 22 2014, @05:19PM
I, too, am an extremely satisfied TekSavvy customer (I have 2 premises, each with an account), and I'm responsible for at least 6 friends/relatives establishing accounts with them.
Real live phone support and no screwing around with people or accounts. Refreshing change vs Bell/Rogers.
Bear in mind, as well (and may have been discussed in the other story), but having this info provided to it is just the beginning for Voltage in its pursuit of damages. They'll have to *prove* that the person(s) linked by ip addy are actually the ones who infringed copyright, and how do they do that without seizing the contacts' devices?
So, whilst it's being presented as a win for the plaintiff, and a loss for those evil pirates, it's actually a *good* thing, as it becomes fiscally unfeasible for Voltage to seek *damages* from the alleged infringers.
Hurray Canada!
cheers,
(Score: 4, Informative) by CluelessMoron on Saturday February 22 2014, @08:32PM
More props to Teksavvy here. I've been with them for ages and have lost count of how many people I have recommended them to.
I have a static IP with them. I run my own mail and web servers, and unlike most other ISPs they don't have a problem with that as long as it's done properly (i.e. no open relays etc). To be fair I don't know if they still do this for new customers though.
Once I asked them if I could have a reverse DNS entry for my static IP to match my hostname because some SMTP servers would reject email otherwise. They did it within hours of my asking. No charge.
Plus they are staunch supporters of privacy and net neutrality. Truly a class act.