Quote:
Originally Posted by longsuffering
I'm not going to play this game with you all night, but I'll bite one last time.
One obvious difference is that Telus, Shaw and Rogers have whole department's whose only purpose is to identify inappropriate use of their services.
In other words, those 'service providers' take reasonable measures to product the public from abuse of those services. Are they perfect? By no means, but they do make a reasonable effort.
I think we've already established, that the "I had no idea" defence rarely works.
Again, I'm not placing blame on the whole affair on RackNine but taking no measures against abuse of your services is not acceptable or reasonable business practice.
Was it reasonable of RackNine to believe that none of their clients would abuse the service? Of course not. We're all aware of any number of automated caller abuses. Given the likelihood of abuse, a responsible service provider, they - like Telus/Rogers/Bell - would be obliged to take reasonable measures to prevent future abuse.
|
The clients in question would have signed
this; how they use the list is the party/candidate/volunteers responsibility. They answer to Elections Canada (in this case).
At any rate Elections Canada and RCMP are not (nor have they ever been) investigating RackNine. Even the media has clued in. The only ones still trying to drag them into this are partisans grasping at straws.