BayTSP goes after Canadian guitar maker
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Wayne Nagy is a nice guy.
He builds blues guitars and plays them, and does what he can politically in Toronto, where he lives.
That’s Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Not Toronto in Woodson County, Kansas, USA.
Or Toronto, South Dakota, USA.
Wayne uses YouTube to describe his guitars and make political statements.
And he’s had a couple of nasty letters, one from American online scalp-hunter BayTSP, and the other from the “Rogers EUA Management Team”.
Bay TSP Internet Police
“I make my own original audio and video clips from scratch and just recieved a notification from BayTSP,” he told p2pnet in a Reader’s Write.
Then, on his Facebook page, “Wayne is picking himself up, dusting himself off before the Bay TSP Internet Police bust me for up-loading my own Home Grown movies???” – he says. “Wayne was framed by the Inernational Bay TSP Internet Police …”
But, like all Canadian ISPs, Rogers values its customers dearly and would never, ever do anything to hurt them or set them up for a bad fall.
Unless they really, really deserved it, of course.
Similarly, BayTSP – a US company, lest we forget – would never, ever accuse a Canadian guitar maker of using copyrighted material in some infringing manner or another unless it was 100% sure the allegations were accurate and built on solid evidence.
Right?
So to have received the two missives referred to earlier, Wayne must have used Rogers to download a shitload of Lionsgate Movies, Lionsgate being the company named.
Right?
You’d think that, wouldn’t you? But nowhere in the threatening emails is the name of even one movie mentioned. And Wayne says he doesn’t have have the first clue about what either Bay TSP or Rogers is talking about.
How did he feel when he was told BayTSP was afte rhis hide?
“I was shocked,” he said. “I’ve never dowlnoaded any movies and I have no idea where this is coming from.”
So, “I’m not going to respond to either notices because I’m not obligated to take down my own movies, and Rogers Cable haven’t cut the internet service off yet,” he says in his Reader’s Write.
Below, FYI, are the letters from BayTSP and Rogers »»»
From: abuse@rogers.com <abuse@rogers.com>
Subject: Rogers EUA Management Team Notice
To: xxx@rogers.com
Received: Thursday, January 22, 2009, 8:31 AM
Dear (blank)Rogers Cable (Rogers) has received a notice stating that activities associated with your IP address are infringing copyright in material(s) owned or exclusively licensed by others.
The full notice is appended to this e-mail below.
Under section 4(d) of the Rogers Yahoo! Hi-Speed Internet End User Agreement (EUA) and Acceptable Use Policy (AUP), you are prohibited from using the Rogers Yahoo! Hi-Speed Internet service to engage in illegal activities, including activities that infringe copyright. Copies of our EUA and AUP are available at:
http://na.edit.client.yahoo.com/rogers/show_static?.form=terms&.intl=ca
Where there has been a violation of our EUA and/or AUP, including the unauthorized distribution of copyright-protected material, Rogers has the right to take appropriate action against you.
If you have any questions about the attached copyright notice, please contact the sender of the notice using the contact information provided in the notice. Please do not reply to this e-mail.
We trust you will comply with our policies and all applicable laws in using the Rogers Yahoo! Hi-Speed Internet service.
Rogers EUA Management Team
Sincerely,EUA Management Team
Rogers Yahoo Hi-Speed Internethttp://info.yahoo.com/legal/ca/rogers/terms/all/00939310
»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
Notice ID: xxx
Notice Date: 21 Jan 2009 18:01:06 GMT
Rogers Cable Communications Inc.
Dear Sir or Madam:
BayTSP, Inc. (”BayTSP”) swears under penalty of perjury that Lionsgate Films has authorized BayTSP to act as its non-exclusive agent for copyright infringement notification. BayTSP’s search of the protocol listed below has detected infringements of Lionsgate Films copyright interests on your IP addresses as detailed in the below report.
BayTSP has reasonable good faith belief that Lionsgate Films, its agents, or the law does not authorize use of the material in the manner complained of in the below report.
The information provided herein is accurate to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, this letter is an official notification to effect removal of the detected infringement listed in the below report. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the Universal Copyright Convention, as well as bilateral treaties with other countries allow for protection of client’s copyrighted work even beyond U.S. borders. The below documentation specifies the exact location of the infringement.
We hereby request that you immediately remove or block access to the infringing material, as specified in the copyright laws, and insure the user refrains from using or sharing with others Lionsgate Films materials in the future.
Further, we believe that the entire Internet community benefits when these matters are resolved cooperatively. We urge you to take immediate action to stop this infringing activity. We appreciate your efforts toward this common goal.
Please send us a prompt response indicating the actions you have taken to resolve this matter, making sure to reference the Notice ID number above in your response. mailto:lions_gate@copyright compliance.com?subject= xxx
If you do not wish to reply by email, please use our Web Interface by clicking on the following link:
http://webreply.baytsp.com/webreply/xxxNote: If your email program has inserted line breaks into either the email or web links above, you can copy and paste the entire link in to you email program, or favorite web browser, respectively.
Nothing in this letter shall serve as a waiver of any rights or remedies of Lionsgate Films with respect to the alleged infringement, all of which are expressly reserved. Should you need to contact me, I may be reached at the below address.
Regards,
Mark Ishikawa
CEO
BayTSP.com Inc. – as an Authorized Agent of Lionsgate Films
xxx Los Gatos, CA 95031
Phone: xxx
lions_gate@copyright-compliance.com
Stay tuned.
January , 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Maybe they want your music in one of their movies and claim it as their own. :p
January 28th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
To say the least, itâs down right intimidating to be strong armed by something you canât see nor put your finger on or whether some ones playing a hoax to interfere with your private communications networking. Our household was going the process of resolving the free Rogerâs telephone to change Bell Sympatico services over to Rogers Cable (that never showed up) when you try place a motive of forms of internet harassment. When imitating some one elseâs watermarks are employed as high handed tactics to kill the Canadian Arts and entrepreneurships what ever processes these people to send out the âOVER KILLâ of legal letter formats should have their CRTC licenses revoked under this Berne Convention.
January 28th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
This is a standard “Notice and Notice” item and has little weight of law in Canada at this time, unless Lionsgate Films actually bring suit in a Canadian jurisdiction. It’s simply a notification that Rogers has forwarded to you. Historically Rogers has done absolutely nothing about these other than forward them. Rogers have not notified BayTSP who you are, although now you’ve actually done it yourself since you included the BayTSP reference in this article along with your name. (Removed – JN)
This is a typical notice issued by copyright agents (ESA, RIAA, MPAA etc) on probing public bittorrent trackers when they find people offering seeds of their copyright material available for download. It has nothing to do with your youtube stuff. If it were the youtube stuff then the notice and notice would have come from as BayTSP to youtube, to Rogers to you. It assumes that the IP provided by BayTSP to Rogers is accurate, and that Rogers accurately traced the IP issued to you at the time. Errors have been made by copyright agents and ISPs on both counts in the past.
Canadian case law at this time has determined that making music available for sharing is not of itself a violation of copyright, and the assumption is that both movies and software would fall under the same case law. Since the judge denied a copyright agent’s suit for music, no cases for software or movies have been actually brought in Canada, unlike the continued harassment US filesharers have had to face.
Whilst copyright is an international treaty, case can be brought by a US entity against you in the US, but it cannot be enforced in Canada. This would only cause a problem if you intend to travel into the US. To affect you in Canada, at this time, case would have to be brought against you in a Canadian jurisdiction. That seems unlikely given case law so far.
January 28th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Thanks for the explanation, but it doesn’t absolve Rogers. Or BayTSP.
Wayne says “itâs down right intimidating to be strong armed”. I’ve been there and this kind of experience is not to be taken lightly.
Cheers!
January 28th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
That’s food for thought, except they would have dated their flicks after the dates my You Tubes were up loaded. I only use my own guitars that are built from different lumbers and have different sound patterns a regular guitar player might take notice if theyâve compared the water marks. The format letters exclude specifically which tunes have been dubbed and down loaded? On the other hand, high pressure sales gimmicks and getting badgered by lawyers might be part of a common intention to force persons into purchasing Copy Right Patents during a recession?
January 28th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
This reminds me of the notice some other Rogers user got and was posted over on the DSLr-Rogers forum. Accused of downloading “Mac warez” when he doesn’t have a Mac. He bitched about it also.
But what can anyone do?
As “sb” said that’s the way it works. Notice-on-Notice. Rogers doesn’t want to hear from you. They even direct you to call the one’s who filed with them. End of story. No one in their right mind will call the one’s who filed the complaint and open dialog with the machine who wants you info and money.
Guilty or not, this is a case where you take it and leave it. Abused or not.
I don’t know of anyone who went the “privacy route” to demand proof of the alleged offense with Rogers showing your IP grabbing whatever it is you were supposed to have grabbed and then compare it with the person entity who filed.
Also what if you find out the IP and times do match? Whatcha gonna do?
What if you have a wireless router and someone else unkown to you did the “offense”? Whatcha gonna do?
I’m not arguing what was done was right. All i’m saying is take the Email print it out and use it as toilet paper.
Not much you can do, not much the US-entity can do (unless a future Canadian law opens the doors for the US to sue you).
I think if Harpers made-in-amercia copyright reform went through, you may have had a nice big fine and lost your house.
Maybe Dr. Geist or CIPPIC could say more on this….
Us regular folk just have to take it and like it.
Wayne, excellent looking guitars! They’re works of art.
January 28th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
I am quite certain that the issue is NOT with what is posted on youtube. BayTSP would have gone after Youtube to pull your material down and they’d have done it: guilty until proven innocent. It wouldn’t have reached Rogers for a “Notice and Notice” letter that you received.
If you’re not a P2P bittorrent user, then there was a mistake made and sadly, that’s not uncommon. As for what Rogers did … their involvement is this …
BayTSP sees copyright material on a Rogers IP address that is available for downloading by others, so they prepare a “Notice of Copyright Infringement”. It is sent to Rogers.
Rogers as a part of “protect our butts so we don’t get sued with our business interests in the US” agrees to forward this notice to the customer using the IP address at the apparent time of the infraction. As a part of that forwarding, they send a standard warning that their terms of service do not allow users to violate copyright. Now, there’s no proof that you’ve violated copyright, only a claim by BayTSP. As a result Rogers rarely takes action other than warn you of their terms of service clause. Rogers don’t actually try to strongarm you … they just forward the notice essentially saying that BayTSP has made the claim. They don’t tell BayTSP who you are, or where you are etc.
The strong arm tactics come from the US entities … in this case BayTSP acting on behalf of LionsGate Films.
January 28th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Rogers is innocent . Got it.
January 28th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
I’m not at all surprised. Arthur Andersen’s Strategy consultants, who brought in the boondoggled computer systems into Ontario by Mike Harris’s Whiz Kids, are also Strategy Consultants employed at Bay STP if you check their Web sight.
Like Yup No Joy suggested, I had just hooked up a brand new router and some one in the perimeter could be stocking my system to download that are in conflict with more Statutes in our Canadian Criminal codes sections 372 False Messages and 137 Fabricating Evidence. They’d have to aquire a Canadian Writ by a Justice of the Peace to monitor and seize personel computer with the entities in the hard drive under specific Collections of Evidence.
It’s not so much that Ted Rogers, the cable guy who just passed away is innocent, our MP’s are supposed to handle these things before Harper shuts down parliament after our MP’s bring up the Arthur Andersen controversy in the house of Commons ???
January 28th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
yup no joy I wasn’t really ‘bitching’ about the notice I was sharing a Mac program. I was pointing out they aren’t always right with their notices. I did find it funny that as a PC user dealing with Rogers caps I was accused of wasting my bandwidth sharing Mac programs.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
ty for sharing that mordin. It was a while ago when your Mac story came out.
So, Wayne, as you see you’re not alone. Other Rogers users got the same BS as what you did.
Thing is, what can someone do about it?
Rogers is supposed to have some sort of data retention. So that BayTSP thing and Rogers Letter to you may be in a file under your name and account.
I’m pissy about what people keep on me.
*If* it was me, I think I would try the following:
Use the privacy act to get the info Rogers has on you, in particular any reference to this incident.
Per the privacy act, you have the right to review the data kept on you and make corrections as required and the company has to keep it.
So w/o even bothering with BAYTSP the most you can do is submit a correction on the data/letter they have saying they are wrong and/or have the wrong person.
If Rogers refuses, then you can bring the issue to the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (its no charge to you) and she will take care of it. (Its about time a case like this hits her office (hint).
I personally would do this because I’m a bitch (as Bell once told me on my answering machine) and do what needs to be done.
Does it change anything? No. But it shows them you won’t be pushed around and take their BS.
If ever some law comes out in 2009-2010 opening doors for the US to come after “past” alleged “abusers”, you made your point on file, which Rogers has to keep.
BTW, What is Rogers data retention time on these records? Good question to ask and find out.
But most people just use these notices as toilet paper or cat liner and forget about it.
Depends how much of a “bitch” you are I guess. I myself wouldn’t tolerate something like this for something I didn’t do.
I don’t know of anyone who went this route or challenged Rogers on this notice-on-notice even when incorrect. But I would because stuff like this annoys me.
Is it worth your time?
January 29th, 2009 at 3:58 am
oh that’s too bad LMAO
i was willing to post exactly step by step how to handle these situations and win but my posts kept on being deleted as being off topic and other accusations … so you loose, and everyone does
until such time as Jon gets his act together and is willing to listen [out of the box] and with open mind you can keep on beating your heads against walls
January 29th, 2009 at 5:22 am
hook
just don’t put to many unmasked links in you post, and it will come up.
YOUR inability to deal with wordpress spam filter technology is not Jon’s fault.
January 29th, 2009 at 5:26 am
btw lionsgate is just a bit pissed off at the moment that they did not gat the 4% of those millions they dreamed up in the case of USA vs Dove (the elitetorrent case where the guy was sentenced to jail (!) but where the judge said now no to lionsgate and riaa’s wet dream about getting tens of thousand or even hundredthousand dollars for “lost sales”)
January 29th, 2009 at 5:27 am
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/01/judge-17000-illegal-downloads-dont-equal-17000-lost-sales.ars
January 29th, 2009 at 8:05 am
All Hail Hook the Savior
January 29th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
@ A_F
as others have stated, their posts are being being blocked even in plain text, go have a look around,
get back to me once you read all the compliants here, realize what they say, do your own tests and come up with suggestions
Lionsgate: obviously you don’t know how their system fully works and how to deal with them, again your SOL
@ January 29th, 2009 at 8:05 am
no, obviously you and many others don’t want info on dealing with elites exposed, bad try at spin … next
January 29th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Someone posted on dslreports this, which I found to be a very good comment:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21825772-
This is strike one.
2 more and yer out!
January 29th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Believe me, I have no love of Rogers. But in this and similar cases with “Notice and Notice” scenarios, they are acting simply as a messenger to ensure they don’t become the target of the copyright agents since they undoubtedly have business interests in the US. Can’t blame them for that. The Notice and Notice scenario is a way of BayTSP giving you a shot across the bow since it appears they aren’t going after you any other way.
If you just installed a new router and didn’t secure it, then it’s quite possible that a neighbour has indeed connected to you, and possibly not deliberately, but inadvertently. Just do a wardrive and discover how many routers out there are offering an open service with the SSID name “LINKSYS”. They’d hardly notice that they were connecting to the wrong router if yours was the same as theirs. For a while, if I connected wirelessly with my laptop from my bedroom, I’d inadvertently connect to my neighbour’s router … and that was 250 feet away. My own router was only 70′ away, but I got a better signal from my neighbour! After I secured my router and laptop to connect only to a specified service, I never connected to my neighbour’s service again!
This is where the Notice and Notice shot across the bow is a good system (compared with them coming after you) because it warns you that someone may be using your connection without your knowing it! Sometimes it takes very strong wording to get people looking at their situation.
Good luck in getting your router and system secured to ensure this doesn’t happen again. As to the Notice and Notice letters, I’d just ignore them.
January 29th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
I’d be anxious to go back to Bell Sympatico 1, 2, 3 just to get Bell solicitors on the Do Not Call List and take advantage of their latest free bees, but then Rogers sends your private info back to their telephone spamsters with out the Rogers-Bay STP collusion explaining their client had “Fired” them for Aiding and Embedding public nuisance letters.
January 29th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Bell gives the same notices. No difference.
January 29th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Correct … Bell does indeed. And if you were to look at the Bell Canada forum on dslreports.com you’d have as many if not more complaints about Bell as you do about Rogers. It’s no “collusion” … the ISP is acting simply as a messenger of BayTSPs copyright notice. They don’t tell BayTSP anything other than that the subject (no name) associated with the notice has been sent their notice and that they have been warned in accordance with the ISP’s terms of service. That’s it. Bell does exactly the same thing. And moreover, you’d have to suffer from Bell trying to get you on a contract that will cost you to get off and termination fees and any other way they can find to screw money out of you.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Wayne, my personal advice to you, Rogers is the better of the 2 evils.
I suggest you do a p2pnet search on Bell and also follow “sb’s” advice above on checking DSLreports about Bell.
You will be jumping out of the fire and direct into the bowels of hell that will cost you an arm and a leg to get out of, IMHO.
Actually I don’t know which would be less expensive? Fighting Bell to get what you pay for? Fighting Bell to get out of a contract they will put you on with all sorts of yummy lock-ins? Or fighting lions-gate?
Stay as you are, or you will be contacting p2pnet about another horror story (which are all pretty well covered on dslreports).
Also, I suggest you go to this web site and do a search on notice-on-notice, http://www.michaelgeist.ca/ (Ontario Law Prof. Chair) Its covered pretty well there (lots of reading on it).
You raised a great concern for all in regards to what appears to be some sort of false accusation from the United States. I personally think you should Email this to Prof. Geist so he will have a reference to this incident should the Harper gov even try to push made-in-the-US copyright reform here again, or try to push a 3-strikes ISP law.
Would be interesting to find out what your total fine and costs would have been if Harpers us-copyright reform made it through. Actually, I think M. Geist’s site has the answer to this.
Make a new guitar video showing your “displeasure” with what happened. Bet it would get lots of hits.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
yup no joy if I was him I’d just ignore it. No sense ‘flagging’ yourself to Rogers and causing more attention directed your way. In most cases nothing comes of theses ‘notice on notice’ emails unless you get too many in a short period of time and Rogers decides you’re not worth it as a customer.
January 29th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
Iâm going to hang on to letter and ignore it, even though itâs a falsified hose job. Where I was curios is nobody has collectively filed a Pro Bono âClass Action Suitâ where the notice assumes an Criminal Act in conspiring to infringement of copy right criminal codes section 408. Passing off.
The allegations in themselves impugn reputations by the volume in lieu of Libel and Defamation criminal code sections 300. Every one who publishes a defamatory libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years?
January 30th, 2009 at 5:39 am
Two things that call into question the process by which BayTSP and other companies identify copyright infringers on BitTorrent
and other p2p networks:
1.) The recent study by the University of Washington that showed these companies’ investigation methods to be inaccurate at best:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/05/the-inexact-science-behind-dmca-takedown-notices/
and
2.) The Pirate Bay, the largest of all the BitTorrent trackers is using fake peers to throw off anti-piracy companies like BayTSP:
http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-tricks-anti-pirates-with-fake-peers-081020/
January 30th, 2009 at 10:16 am
The problem with that is that you’d have to lay suit in the US since BayTSP is a US company and no good going after a Canadian ISP involved since they haven’t accused you; they’ve just told you what they can do if you are guilty of copyright infringement. For most people the risks and personal cost of going back at companies like BayTSP are just too much. As wrong as the process is, it requires the US injustice system to and government to let them know they can’t get away with it.
January 30th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
yup. I agree with mordin and sb 100%. Its the way it is. There is no fighting it. Nothing will happen to Wayne, anyhow (at least with the current laws).
The only thing I don’t agree with is what mordin said here:
“No sense âflaggingâ yourself to Rogers and causing more attention”
I think there should be attention, if Wayne wants it. If and when we get copyright reform or a 3 strikes law, this is exactly the type of thing that will happen. Needs to be known. An awareness.
January 30th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Wrong. Rogers and Bell give out notices, If you persist to P2P they throttle, eventually cut you off. Usually not for sharing but any reason they can find. You still have an account and thousands have lost theirs. So don’t bullshit here or on dslreports. The only way is for users to fight back.
Everyone looses 
But we can’t do this since Jon deletes posts as off topic or conspiracies.
January 30th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
@ hook:
“So donât bullshit here or on dslreports.”
Why not? You do it all the time, ie, “… Jon deletes posts as off topic or conspiracies.
Everyone looses 
”
It’s easy. Keep your personal agenda personal.
Cheers!
January 30th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
@ Jon
It’s not a personal agenda at all. It’s what users “need” to know in order to fight MAFIAA, ISP’s and the rest of elites. And there’s a whole line of PPL behind me ready to get in on subject if you stop deleting their posts
They are sick and tired of being shut out, abused, manipulated and taken advantage of by the system with no way to fight back. And your site as well as rest of them is perfect proof of it.
You post all these stories without giving solutions, and how PPL can do something comprehensive without costing them an arm and a leg … for even the computer illiterate. Many don’t even qualify for legal aid. THAT’S why these subjects need to be brought up, discussed and solutions implemented. Before this happens they need to be educated as to who’s their enemy. When you wrap your stick skull around that then we can talk.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Talk about lucky timing.
What this all comes down to is this:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=635_1233314644
When you realize that attacks on P2P by elites is a matter of gang warfare, a gang that holds most of the cards, then and only then can you start to open your mind to fixing it.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Sorry i’m lost. Maybe I didn’t see the deleted posts. Maybe its better they’re deleted?
Maybe make a topic called, “the agenda of Hook” and post all his rantings there and let the “whole line of PPL behind [him] ready to get in on subject”?
If we don’t see a following we can brush him off as chronoss’ twin brother?
January 30th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
I’m still trying to figure out what the “bullshit” is.
Its not the first time this happens with these notices. Whats the bullshit?
Can someone explain wtf is being spewn here?
Is this topic being purposely derailed?
@hook, whats the BS about how thousands lost their accounts? Can you point me to at least 5 Rogers and 5 Bell posts some place where people lost their accounts? TY.
January 31st, 2009 at 12:08 am
Hook, you may believe you have the answer to various ills and maybe you do. That being so, do the obvious – start your own site and then you can enlighten people whenever you want.
“…thereâs a whole line of PPL behind me ready to get in on subject if you stop deleting their posts.”
You’re trying to create the illusion that I’m deleting a lot of posts from a lot of people. That’s rubbish. I dumped two of your posts, that I can recall, and perhaps one other from someone else. I don’t really remember. This is far from being the only topic on p2pnet.
“You post all these stories without giving solutions”
I’m not smart enough to give solutions, even if I wanted to. p2pnet is an information and advocacy site, and that’s all.
“THATâS why these subjects need to be brought up, discussed and solutions implemented.”
OK. So start hook.net and that line of people can join you there.
“When you wrap your stick skull around that then we can talk.
Like everyone else who comes here, you have the benefit of being able to post anonymously on p2pnet, but you’re abusing that.
You write as though you think I have an interest in talking with you. I do not. You’re welcome only so long as you don’t use try to use p2pnet to promote ideas about gangs, elites, conspiracies, and so on. This isn’t the place for them.
You’ve shown you can contribute in a meaningful way, as with the NFB inquiry you did [ http://www.p2pnet.net/story/18284 ]. That was really useful.
So last warning – back off, or take off.
Cheers! And thanks …
January 31st, 2009 at 6:32 am
Fair Enough, since you are doing advocacy [to influence outcomes in political, legal or other ways] for purposes of keeping P2P free and open to all. Restricting P2P is only a tiny part of what shills have in store and THAT you won’t learn till it’s too late. I really do hope you are prepared and for your family’s sake too.
btw: rarely have I posted without including my email addie.
February 1st, 2009 at 3:20 am
Wayne says:”The allegations in themselves impugn reputations by the volume in lieu of Libel and Defamation criminal code sections 300. Every one who publishes a defamatory libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years?”
Except, I think, the defamatory statement must be public and harm your reputation. In the case of the notices, they are between you & Rogers. Rogers isn’t really saying they think you’re guilty of anything, they are just pasting on the notice.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
If you do not wish to reply by email, please use our Web Interface by clicking on the following link:
http://webreply.baytsp.com/webreply/xxx
you need to click that link to see what it was that was downloaded and from where