|
>Only if They don't provide a tool
to remove a CHK from your store. And
>of course a list of violating keys. Which of course it would be illegal >for you to verify. Yes, I agree you have a point, there.
I'm not quite sure if running a tool of a third party can be mandatory without a
courts' order, however, even in the context of removing illegal content. But I
do concede that, in principle, you may be right. In any case, it's true that
strong encryption and such, so that even the RIAA can't make an easy-removal
tool would be better (and have aditional security in the case of seisure), but I
do not know how burdersome it is going to be on the system? Clearly, with the
old concept, there were too many probs, or else it would not have been
removed.
That said, it's not the only possible
way of making it impossible for the riaa to make these 'easy tools', thnks to
the very same craplaws that they have been lobbying in congress. The DMCA (or
another law, but I'm sure there is one, in the usa, as well as in europe, fairly
recently) makes it illegal to circumvent protectionmeasures such as
encryption, even when it's done to/for use in a legal way. So, if you make such
a protectionmeasure on your encryptionprogram, even when trivially easy to
break, they still would be doing an illegal act. It's like beating them with
their own weapons. :-)
I'm puzzled by your last remark, though. Read it in
another response of you to me too. I think you are a bit too much focussing on
CP. I said Mr.Riaa, after all (hint, hint). It is not only possible and legal
for copyrightowners to search for their copyrighted works, but they are already
doing that en masse today, ordering ISPs to bring down websites and what not,
after they had a warning. I agree, with freenet, you may make the case that it's
a form of entrapment; that *they* put the file there in the first place, merely
by requesting it..but that's another discussion alltogether.
For the RIAA, it is far from being above their means or
capabilities to request a copyrighted file, snif out the chks, look at the nodes
it get it from, and, as you rightfully said, treat us as an ISP, with the
obligation, thus, to look and remove the offending chks. Even when they can't be
sure if it's actually on those nodes, you would still have to look and compare
and make sure...a very burdersome and timewasting effort, which would not lie
well with most freenetters, me thinks.
I don't even think it's a mere possibility, it's almost a
garantuee the RIAA&CO will use the same pestering instruments to their
disposal, as they are already doing now. Therefor, I would strongly suggest some
way of making sure that, as a user, one is freed from his sort of tactics, and
it becomes impossible ('within reasonable effort') to check and delete the chks
the RIAA claims is copyrightinfringement.
|
_______________________________________________ chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
