Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
at 8:56 PM, John Levine wrote: In article you write: I'm very sorry to read that, as an ISP, you have to comply with a para-judicial process that puts you in charge of censorship. Dealing with DMCA notices is a matter of statute law in the US, and it is a really, really bad idea to ignore them unread. It doesn't matter what anyone here thinks about it. R's, John PS: Here's why: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/17420540355/sensing-blood-water-all-major-labels-sue-cox-ignoring-their-dmca-notices.shtml This. Plus I’m largely indifferent to it. On one hand, I’m a firm believer in a free and open Internet. But on the other hand, it’s so easy to hide your online activity that I have a hard time feeling sorry for anyone who gets caught up in the drag net. Anyone who gets a notice from us is completely and utterly apathetic about online privacy and it’s astonishing to be just how lazy people really are. I only have a few hundred users, so definitely not a representative sample size, but in all my time here we’ve only had a single repeat offender.
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
In article you write: >I'm very sorry to read that, as an ISP, you have to comply with a >para-judicial process that puts you in charge of censorship. Dealing with DMCA notices is a matter of statute law in the US, and it is a really, really bad idea to ignore them unread. It doesn't matter what anyone here thinks about it. R's, John PS: Here's why: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/17420540355/sensing-blood-water-all-major-labels-sue-cox-ignoring-their-dmca-notices.shtml
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
Hi Daniel, Le 06/08/2018 à 16:48, Daniel Corbe a écrit : > It doesn't work like that though. I can't just bitbucket DMCA takedown > requests because I also provide people with cable TV service. That > means I have content contracts and these contracts are all very specific > about what I need to do to process DMCA takedown requests. I'm sure > that they receive reports regularly from the companies they contract to > do DMCA enforcment. Or maybe they don't and I have no idea what I'm > talking about. But I'm still not going to put my content contracts at > risk because I think my users would be even more pissed off if their > cable TV packages were suddenly unavailable to them. I'm very sorry to read that, as an ISP, you have to comply with a para-judicial process that puts you in charge of censorship. I'd like to think that you'd have some margin to let these "copyright holders" fuck-off when it comes to your mere-pipe services. But I guess it depends on the jurisdiction you're operating under. Providing IP services and CATV are two different things that should not be liable one to another. If you have any right to give them a finger, please, on behalf of our community, give it to them. If not, please work harder on denouncing those indecent contracts. Best regards, -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
Le 2018-08-06 16:03, Jérôme Nicolle a écrit : Hi Jack, Le 05/08/2018 à 21:51, na...@jack.fr.eu.org a écrit : By "appropriate place", you mean "the trash bin" ? Nope, that would eat-up storage and IOs. The proper destination is /dev/null, unless they provide you with the required informations to send a bill. Straight to unless, right ;-) mh Best regards,
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 10:09 AM, wrote: > > Asked and answered already. > > On 8/5/2018 16:53:35, "John Levine" wrote: > >See https://www.copyright.gov/dmca-directory/ > > If you are in fact registered there, it becomes *their* problem to send > their reports to the address you registered. > > I forgot that exists; seems like the only legitimate source for that information, then.
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 09:51:17 -0500, Matt Harris said: > But then the question becomes "how are they supposed to find the 'proper > address' for their reports?" Asked and answered already. On 8/5/2018 16:53:35, "John Levine" wrote: >See https://www.copyright.gov/dmca-directory/ If you are in fact registered there, it becomes *their* problem to send their reports to the address you registered. pgpvkBrHfW53Z.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:46 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > This is a solvable problem. If they're sending unsolicited bulk email > (aka "spam"), then they are, by definition, spammers. Block them and > move on. If/when they decide to send proper DMCA notices and send them > to the proper address, perhaps you can then allow them to petition for > the privilege of access to your mail system. > > ---rsk > But then the question becomes "how are they supposed to find the 'proper address' for their reports?" If you run a whois server and link it from your RIRs or create a custom "DMCA Compliance" POC in the RIR listings then you could maybe list that sort of thing there, but most address maintainers do neither, so by default whatever address is listed on those net block records with the RIR seems appropriate enough to me. There's no other established protocol for determining an appropriate contact (like calling the associated phone number and asking, or trying to determine your web url and browing that site for it, or something else much more involved.) If there should be a different protocol established for that, then we need to figure it out and document that and get a critical mass of reporters to buy in to it.
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
On 8/5/2018 18:46:36, "Rich Kulawiec" wrote: On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 07:43:36PM +, Daniel Corbe wrote: This is a solvable problem. If they're sending unsolicited bulk email (aka "spam"), then they are, by definition, spammers. Block them and move on. If/when they decide to send proper DMCA notices and send them to the proper address, perhaps you can then allow them to petition for the privilege of access to your mail system. It doesn't work like that though. I can't just bitbucket DMCA takedown requests because I also provide people with cable TV service. That means I have content contracts and these contracts are all very specific about what I need to do to process DMCA takedown requests. I'm sure that they receive reports regularly from the companies they contract to do DMCA enforcment.Or maybe they don't and I have no idea what I'm talking about. But I'm still not going to put my content contracts at risk because I think my users would be even more pissed off if their cable TV packages were suddenly unavailable to them.
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
Hi Jack, Le 05/08/2018 à 21:51, na...@jack.fr.eu.org a écrit : > By "appropriate place", you mean "the trash bin" ? Nope, that would eat-up storage and IOs. The proper destination is /dev/null, unless they provide you with the required informations to send a bill. Best regards, -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14
Looking for a CBS Interactive Contact
Can someone in Tier 3 level support from CBS Interactive please contact me at neil-johnson at uiowa dot edu? (For some reason I can't subscribe that address to this list). (Yes, I'm a real network engineer at the University) We are having reach-ability issues with CBS All Access content at the University of Iowa. I've tried reaching out to your support teams via your web page and by phone, but never get a follow-up response. If you need some incentive to respond, your losing CBS All Access subscribers in the dorms of a Big 10 institution because they can't access your content from some of our networks. Thanks! - Neil -- Neil Johnson
