I think we are going to start just following Google's take on DMCA notices. I would like ours to send the customer an email requiring the to go to a webpage in the next 7 days or be blocked. They will then be tracked watching a video of sorts that explains why they are watching this video. I would also explain that the company sending the complaint may want to settle, but it would be up to the customer to take whatever action they deemed appropriate. Further, I would tell the customer that I would not disclose their CPNI without a court order.
This is what they send out.... [image: Inline image 1] And then they forward (Insert company here)'s complaint, in this case BMG. [image: Inline image 2] Regards, Chuck On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > I hit send too quickly. Here's how to NAT your customers to a range of > ports. > > > http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:IP/Firewall/NAT#Carrier-Grade_NAT_.28CGNAT.29_or_NAT444 > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Mike Hammett" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Monday, March 7, 2016 12:01:07 PM > > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee > > Perhaps our ticketing systems need an input box where we can copy + paste > the ACNS XML into and it files it with the correct customer? > > If you're NATing your customers, you should be NATing them to a particular > range so you can track them easier. > > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Jon Auer" <[email protected]> > *To: *"Animal Farm" <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Monday, March 7, 2016 11:32:01 AM > *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 <http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielwhite84>: Twitter >> <https://twitter.com/DanielWhite84> >> >> >> >> *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 <[email protected]> >> >> *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 <[email protected]> >> >> *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 <[email protected]> >> >> *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] <[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. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> >> This >> email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. >> www.avast.com >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> >> > > > >
