TekSavvy takes pirate site blocking battle to Canada’s Supreme Court
TekSavvy is not a great deal. But you get incredibly good tech support and they’re an honest company. I will, by principle, stay with them.
Bell just installed fibre to the side of my house for free and want to give me “2 years of 1GB symmetrical” for $35/mo CAD. Nope. Never in a million years will I do business with you, Bell.
I am always proud to have TekSavvy as my ISP. It can be a pain getting a ticket requiring a tech to be sent out since they lease Roger's lines in my area, but it's a small price to pay for being the customer of someone that stands up for its users and the internet as a whole.
> If a site-blocking order is an available remedy, what analytical framework governs its use, and how must this framework account for the impact of such an order on freedom of expression?
On the one hand, it's unreasonable to expect a court to specify a perfect algorithm for determining which sites can and can't be blocked, but on the other hand, the fact that such a dangerous remedy has been invented by the judicial branch, with no clear guidance from the legislature, suggests that the system needs to "fail open" by protecting fundamental rights, until the government can pass a law that gives some parameters to how this censorship power may be used.
TekSavvy's blog/newsletter is usually an interesting read.
Following a complaint from major media companies Rogers, Bell and TVA, the Court ordered several major ISPs to block
Absolutely wild. The way I'm reading it this was not a court case where the site was sued and lost. A rights holder company filed a complaint and the court just said "sure" and ordered private companies to censor the internet. No trial, no evidence, no nothing. Holy shit.
I like TekSavvy, but they have no gigabit offering. Upload is way too low.