----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 3:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Freenet-chat] Attack on Freenet -- Already!
>I would strongly suggest reading up on the DMCA - find the text itself at:
> http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/occ/dmca/pl105_304.htm
A google search for "isp dmca liability" returned this link near the top of
the results, http://eon.law.harvard.edu/property99/liability/main.html. It
seems to be part of a study guide that was produced soon after the DMCA was
passed. Parts of it seem to address your question,
>Don't they have to ask you to remove the content before cutting you
>off?
That page, and others I ran across, refer to a procedure where you have to
register with the copyright office (for $20!) as an ISP, basically promising
to be under their thumb. This allows them to easily contact you as they
please with requests to remove content.
Being under their thumb also includes turning over to them the source of the
content in question, which led me to think of a possible change to freenet
to make this impossible. Currently, it is possible in some cases to look in
the store_<port> file and see that a particular file was obtained through a
particular node. I understand that this allows the node to route a request
in an intelligent direction when it doesn't have the requested key. But
maybe there are ways to achieve this effect without storing the exact
correspondence between nodes and keys. All that is needed is a function
that for a given key returns a node to which it would be reasonable to route
the request. This function could rely on statistical summary information
(perhaps with a little randomness thrown in in patches where data is sparse)
rather than exact records.
Kyle.
_______________________________________________
Freenet-chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-chat
