Talking about transit not hosting, the bulk of notices follow a standard format designed to make it easy for you. Then there are the outliers that want you to serve a John Doe with a payment demand or legal threat, without going to the trouble to get a court order for the customer’s identity so they can do the dirty work themselves. That’s the only part I have trouble with. And I’m not sure if I want the government to clarify what we should do in those cases, I might not like the answer.
The other potential problem in light of the Cox decision is what constitutes an acceptable repeat infringer policy. I think most of us are unlikely to face a Cox scenario. But nowhere did Congress say you couldn’t let ex-customers sign back up for X amount of time after being suspended, that didn’t stop the court from making that interpretation. Also the court seemed to feel Cox only cared about keeping paying customers because they would mostly try to educate customers or give them a stern talking to and multiple chances rather than fire them. Well, duh! I wonder if at some point the 6 Strikes program will face court review, it’s pretty toothless. From: Jon Auer Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 11:32 AM To: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee I filled out that survey and then realized that most of the burden comes down to the shi**y state of ticketing systems / backoffice tooling (aside from not being able to file the registered agent form online). Pretty much all the DMCA notices come with ACNS XML. It's easy enough to parse, open tickets on customers, and handle as automatically or manually as you want. For a industry-to-industry self-policing mechanism it's pretty painless. The only DMCA notice we've received without ACNS XML came from CitiBank's SOC when one of our shared hosting customers got hacked and was hosting a phishing page with their logo on it. Like most things ISPish the pain comes in the valley between when you start and have so few customers that it's a novelty/doesn't take too much time and when you have so many customers/it's enough of a pain that you automate it. Of course, when the valley is everything between some guy with like 200 subs and Comcast there's a lot of people feeling the pain, but the pain shouldn't be there--we should be demanding that our back office ticketing/billing venders provide ACNS parsing. We need to get our collective ducks in a row and manage DMCA well enough that the rights-holders don't get any more bent out of shape and we end up getting served with complaints that have teeth-subpoenas and whatnot. Can't identify customers because NAT? Log the port translations. ACNS includes port numbers. Got people whining about costs of storing NAT logs? C'mon. Storage is cheap. There's no such thing as free lunch and that's the cost of not assigning public addresses to customers. I got 99 problems with DMCA but the takedown process (on the service provider side) ain't one. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Daniel White <[email protected]> wrote: WISPA will be filling comments on the recent request for information from the US Copyright Office – specifically on the burden of DMCA. Thank you, Daniel White [email protected] Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590 Skype: danieldwhite Social: LinkedIn: Twitter From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2016 2:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee And it should prove that we did everything possible to keep our hands clean. From: Jeremy Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 2:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee So you actually made them follow up on the message with the copyright holder? That seems even more hardcore than disconnecting them. I guess it does have the advantage of not losing the customer though. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: I had excellent luck in immediate shutdown until they got the copyright holder to give me an all clear. I don’t think I ever lost a customer. Some of them were down for a week or so at times. From: Cassidy B. Larson Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 1:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee We send the notice and call them after to make sure they ack it. On the third strike, we suspend their service until they call in. Letting them know at that time if we receive future notices it’ll be a $100 administrative fee per notice we receive. They usually decide to go elsewhere at that point. On Feb 2, 2016, at 1:45 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: Usually we send a couple notices and never hear about it again. They usually quit the offending activity, or encrypt their traffic. When they just keep going and going we have to do something. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: I will never forget the first time I shut somebody off for pirating a movie. Porn movie. Turns out to be the kid of a principal of a local school. Dad was pretty hot for being shut down until I explained the reason. I told him once he makes nice with the copyright holder we can turn him back on. I think he was worried it would leak into the press or the schoolboard would become aware. That never happened. From: Jeremy Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 1:41 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee Yeah, we expect them to switch. We are uninstalling the equipment. I am just trying to figure out how long we should ban them for. I really don't care if they ever come back. Pirates are a hassle for me, and could potentially land any of us in front of a judge. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ray <[email protected]> wrote: Realistically if you shut me off I would switch to a new provider within a day. I don't know what kind of person would stick around on a ban no matter what the length of time is. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: For those of you who actually do some sort of enforcement, what amount of time do you ban them for? I figure even at 90 days they will get a new provider. So I was just going to go with one year. Is that excessive? On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Justin Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: You designate an “agent” within your company. I typical register the CEO, operations, or someone like that that as the agent. You would have no issue registering yourself as the agent. I would recommend you create a copyright@ e-mail address and use that as the designated e-mail contact. That way you know a request to copyright@ is most likely someone following protocol. It’s like CALEA. Their just needs to be the proper person on file to contact, and server due process should it come to that. Justin Wilson [email protected] --- http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman On Feb 2, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: I really have no idea about that. So I need to hire an agent, and then ignore all but the requests that come to me from that agent? On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Justin Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: The biggest thing I use in a determination is did they send it to the Registered Copyright Agent on file? You do have one correct? :-) http://copyright.gov/onlinesp/ If you have one, and it’s not sent to that agent, it’s not a real request IMHO. Justin Wilson [email protected] --- http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman On Feb 2, 2016, at 1:34 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: It can't charge the copyright holder, but could it charge to company sending out the notices if they aren't the CRH? :) On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Keefe John <[email protected]> wrote: This has been discussed before, the DMCA safe harbor doesn't allow the provider to charge the copyright holder for this. On 2/2/2016 12:03 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: That's going to end up in a big mess of a lawsuit eventually. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Sterling Jacobson <[email protected]> wrote: Haha! If it’s against your AUP, make sure you have a clause in there that says you charge per incident. Then go ahead and charge the customer. Sounds like if you are just going to kick them off eventually, might as well try to keep them, but make it costly. If they don’t pay it, then they are off. Nothing legally wrong with it if its in your policy I think. From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2016 10:57 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee Oh wow, youre seriously looking for a fight with customers On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: What do you thing about charging a fee every time that a customer gets a DMCA takedown notice. These notices take time to track down and follow up on. If we charged $20 every time it would make it not really worth it to pirate that $10 movie. I would think that it should be legal, so long as we add it to our customer agreement. Anyone ever thought about this? Right now we pass on 5 of them and then make them find a new provider. It seems like they would be less likely to hit 5 if they had to pay $20 for each one. We really don't want these guys on our network anyway, so no sweat if they just cancel. Is anyone out there charging customers a fee for these? I know most of you just ignore them, but we like passing them on, as it lowers our overall usage. -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. www.avast.com
