RE: Six Strike Rule (Was: William was raided...)
If you are a facilities based broadband provider in the US you have to comply with CALEA. There is no coming to some agreement, you have a legal obligation to comply. No more, and no less. You don't have to comply with requests from agencies other than law enforcement under CALEA but you may need to under other requirements such as DMCA. You should know what the minimum legal requirements are and if you don't want to do more than that, fine. However, you could get a court order telling you to do almost anything and it would be expensive and potentially put you in contempt not to comply with them. I am not a lawyer but dealt with these requirements for years on the job. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Barry Shein [mailto:b...@world.std.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 11:22 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Six Strike Rule (Was: William was raided...) On December 4, 2012 at 11:10 ja...@thebaughers.com (Jason Baugher) wrote: We don't do content inspection. We don't really want to know what our customers are doing, and even if we did, there's not enough time in the day to spend paying attention. When we get complaints from the various copyright agencies, we warn the customer to stop. When we hit a certain number of complaints, its bye-bye customer. This is why there's a need for some sort of reasonable, organized response outlined in writing. In my experience law enforcement (and others) will try to shift whatever investigative tasks are convenient to them to anyone in the loop. Why not, it costs them nothing to have you running around all day and night doing investigative work for them. They will generally cite the seriousness of the underlying crime as (bottomless) justification for your contribution. The rational response is to sit down as a group within some framework and come to some agreement* with them as to what is a reasonable and sufficient response in these cases. Otherwise you're just the complaint desk at Macy's taking all comers and subject to whatever they can dream up to try to get you to solve their problems. * Agreement with LEOs is best, a unilateral document would at least open discussion one would hope and move towards that end. -- -Barry Shein The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD| Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool Die| Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
Re: Six Strike Rule (Was: William was raided...)
On December 4, 2012 at 11:10 ja...@thebaughers.com (Jason Baugher) wrote: We don't do content inspection. We don't really want to know what our customers are doing, and even if we did, there's not enough time in the day to spend paying attention. When we get complaints from the various copyright agencies, we warn the customer to stop. When we hit a certain number of complaints, its bye-bye customer. This is why there's a need for some sort of reasonable, organized response outlined in writing. In my experience law enforcement (and others) will try to shift whatever investigative tasks are convenient to them to anyone in the loop. Why not, it costs them nothing to have you running around all day and night doing investigative work for them. They will generally cite the seriousness of the underlying crime as (bottomless) justification for your contribution. The rational response is to sit down as a group within some framework and come to some agreement* with them as to what is a reasonable and sufficient response in these cases. Otherwise you're just the complaint desk at Macy's taking all comers and subject to whatever they can dream up to try to get you to solve their problems. * Agreement with LEOs is best, a unilateral document would at least open discussion one would hope and move towards that end. -- -Barry Shein The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD| Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool Die| Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
Re: Six Strike Rule (Was: William was raided...)
On 2012-12-04 11:51, Nick B wrote: In a related note, I wonder if the six-strike rule would violate the ISP's safe harbor, as it's clearly content inspection. As performed in France, what happens is that some copyright owner contacts the ISP that IP address a.b.c.d had accessed/served copyright infringing data at date/time dd-mm- HH:mm providing some kind of detail on how they figured that out. That report is a 'strike' and gets forwarded to the user. If that then happens 6 times they are blocked. The ISP as such does not do any content inspection. It is though assumed that some ISPs simply count bytes and that they do some investigation themselves when you reach a certain bandwidth threshold (it seems to correlate that copyright infringers are downloading a lot more than normal webbrowsing users...) Greets, Jeroen
Re: Six Strike Rule (Was: William was raided...)
We don't do content inspection. We don't really want to know what our customers are doing, and even if we did, there's not enough time in the day to spend paying attention. When we get complaints from the various copyright agencies, we warn the customer to stop. When we hit a certain number of complaints, its bye-bye customer. On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote: On 2012-12-04 11:51, Nick B wrote: In a related note, I wonder if the six-strike rule would violate the ISP's safe harbor, as it's clearly content inspection. As performed in France, what happens is that some copyright owner contacts the ISP that IP address a.b.c.d had accessed/served copyright infringing data at date/time dd-mm- HH:mm providing some kind of detail on how they figured that out. That report is a 'strike' and gets forwarded to the user. If that then happens 6 times they are blocked. The ISP as such does not do any content inspection. It is though assumed that some ISPs simply count bytes and that they do some investigation themselves when you reach a certain bandwidth threshold (it seems to correlate that copyright infringers are downloading a lot more than normal webbrowsing users...) Greets, Jeroen
Re: Six Strike Rule (Was: William was raided...)
ISOC-NY ran a half day conflab on 6 strikes (which incidentally - and for reasons that escape me - is a name the Copyright Alert System perpetrators wish would not be used) last November 15. A full archive is available at http://isoc-ny.org/p2/4527 On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.comwrote: We don't do content inspection. We don't really want to know what our customers are doing, and even if we did, there's not enough time in the day to spend paying attention. When we get complaints from the various copyright agencies, we warn the customer to stop. When we hit a certain number of complaints, its bye-bye customer. On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote: On 2012-12-04 11:51, Nick B wrote: In a related note, I wonder if the six-strike rule would violate the ISP's safe harbor, as it's clearly content inspection. As performed in France, what happens is that some copyright owner contacts the ISP that IP address a.b.c.d had accessed/served copyright infringing data at date/time dd-mm- HH:mm providing some kind of detail on how they figured that out. That report is a 'strike' and gets forwarded to the user. If that then happens 6 times they are blocked. The ISP as such does not do any content inspection. It is though assumed that some ISPs simply count bytes and that they do some investigation themselves when you reach a certain bandwidth threshold (it seems to correlate that copyright infringers are downloading a lot more than normal webbrowsing users...) Greets, Jeroen -- --- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -- -
Re: Six Strike Rule (Was: William was raided...)
Marketing... They don't want to risk it getting caught in the current backlash against 3-strikes laws. Owen On Dec 4, 2012, at 11:13 , Joly MacFie j...@punkcast.com wrote: ISOC-NY ran a half day conflab on 6 strikes (which incidentally - and for reasons that escape me - is a name the Copyright Alert System perpetrators wish would not be used) last November 15. A full archive is available at http://isoc-ny.org/p2/4527 On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.comwrote: We don't do content inspection. We don't really want to know what our customers are doing, and even if we did, there's not enough time in the day to spend paying attention. When we get complaints from the various copyright agencies, we warn the customer to stop. When we hit a certain number of complaints, its bye-bye customer. On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote: On 2012-12-04 11:51, Nick B wrote: In a related note, I wonder if the six-strike rule would violate the ISP's safe harbor, as it's clearly content inspection. As performed in France, what happens is that some copyright owner contacts the ISP that IP address a.b.c.d had accessed/served copyright infringing data at date/time dd-mm- HH:mm providing some kind of detail on how they figured that out. That report is a 'strike' and gets forwarded to the user. If that then happens 6 times they are blocked. The ISP as such does not do any content inspection. It is though assumed that some ISPs simply count bytes and that they do some investigation themselves when you reach a certain bandwidth threshold (it seems to correlate that copyright infringers are downloading a lot more than normal webbrowsing users...) Greets, Jeroen -- --- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -- -
