Nope.. just a few pervs and a lot of bit torrent users. We forward the messages and shame them if we can. But it isn't solid proof of anything. I can't terminate their service. We have our own ARIN space so they automate a process to contact any ABUSE@ email associated with ip space.
The organizations generally target newly released movies/shows. It wasn't too bad initially but now its every single thing out there. Since the TPP was pretty much a done deal that is when these new legal firms jumped in and started sending them by the buttload. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 12:17:28 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Here we go - TPP Full Text Released I would consult your lawyer, but I really don't see how an international treaty has any bearing on you unless/until US laws are changed as a result, which I doubt will happen or even needs to happen. Also, if you are getting hundreds of automated requests per week now, either you have a boatload of customers, or you need to ask what is different about your customer base. I think that is a very unusual level of DMCA notices. Maybe you have a lot of hotspots or something? -----Original Message----- From: Steve Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 11:05 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Here we go - TPP Full Text Released Yeah I'm going to let the lawyers sort that out. That link was to New Zealand's copy. Each country has a few changes to the agreement. But for the most part it is harmonized to force ISP's to comply to any copyright claim. It means we in most cases won't be liable. But we have to turn over records or inform customers. What does that mean? It means that any tom dick and harry can start sending letters to us and we have to reply to them and forward to the customer the complaint. I already received hundred of automated requests per week. Now I need to come up with an automated process to forward them. I have to shame our customers and tell them to refrain from their actions. So it is up to us now to be the police and to notify customers. Its just a boat load of new work we have to do just because someone is "claiming" something. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 11:55:22 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Here we go - TPP Full Text Released That's not how I read the text you cited. It seems to say each country will have a legal process for copyright holders to obtain this information. Currently the US has the DMCA plus copyright holders can obtain a court order. I don't see where that would have to change. I am not a lawyer, but even if I am interpreting this wrong, where is the enforceability? Congress would have to feel compelled to pass more restrictive laws to abide by this vague language in a treaty they don't like anyway. Unless/until US laws are changed, I don't see how this applies to us. -----Original Message----- From: Steve Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 9:42 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [AFMUG] Here we go - TPP Full Text Released We are now the internet police. http://www.mfat.govt.nz/Treaties-and-International-Law/01-Treaties-for-which-NZ-is-Depositary/0-Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Text.php Internet service providers must give your name if requested by copyright holders: "Each Party shall provide procedures... that enable a copyright owner that has made a legally sufficient claim of copyright infringement to obtain expeditiously from an Internet Service Provider information in the provider’s possession identifying the alleged infringer, in cases in which that information is sought for the purpose of protecting or enforcing that copyright." ISPs must move quickly to remove material with a copyright claim against it: " these conditions shall include a requirement for Internet Service Providers to expeditiously remove or disable access to material residing on their networks or systems upon obtaining actual knowledge of the copyright infringement" "An Internet Service Provider that removes or disables access to material in good faith under subparagraph (a) shall be exempt from any liability for having done so, "
