<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Robert,<br>
I should not have been so absolute. There is a circumstance where
both meta data retention and this "Pirate Code". Will not go
ahead. It's if Australia withdraws from or modify the terms of the
US/AU FTA. Under the Free Trade Agreement we need to take all
reasonable measures to insure Australian's follow the law (US LAW)
in regard to dealing with the rights holders. That's up to
providing evidence to convict an Australian in a US court. <br>
<br>
So as long as we keep on with the US/AU FTA we will be doing this
in some form or another. Doing nothing is not making reasonable
efforts. That's not taking into account eveything we dont know
we have agreed to as part of the Five Eye's . <br>
<br>
Let's get on with working out how to make this as least painful
for us as possible. To my mind that's working with whomever has
taken the initiative to set this up. We are in a better boat here
then data retention. At least someone is slightly on our side. <br>
<br>
Matt.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 23/02/2015 12:50 pm, Robert Hudson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOu9xNJ76FJ45QtmWKuEXycUncMr9bPPpfCH-RpREg40j70kbQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">I disagree that metadata retention is a done deal -
the AGD has tried four times over the last eight years to get it
up, and has not yet succeeded. This is at least partially
because people DO stand against it. If we don't voice our
opposition, then yes, it will get up, and the end result is
pre-determined. That isn't a world I wish to live in.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The same goes here. The government told the related
industries to come up with a voluntary code. Thus far, the
propsal looks very heavily weighted in favour of the "rights
owners", at the detriment to the other involved parties (ISPs).
The Comms Alliance isn't widely representative of the industry
(it may carry customer numbers behind it, but not operator
numbers).</p>
<p dir="ltr">Frankly, I hope this phase fails, that the Comms
Alliance and rights holders fail to agree, and the government
has to step in and create something. Then at least there is a
chance that if what they come up with is as stupid as some of
their other attempted legistlation (metadata, anyone), they can
be shown to be clueless and put in a real position where toxic
legislation results in political fallout.</p>
<p dir="ltr">If the Comms Alliance continues to bend over for the
rights-holders, there can be only one winner - and that winner
won't be consumers or carriers.</p>
<div class="gmail_quot<blockquote class=" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Not sure this sort of response is helpful in the long run
Rod. The facts are that the Government has done this deal as
part of the US/AUS Free trade agreement. No amount of
wishing it away will make it not so. Even though I might
agree that it's not our problem and it's expense we cant
afford. The deal is done. The horse has bolted. <br>
<br>
All we can do now is try and make suggestions to make it
easier for us to manage the process. But this like the meta
data retention will happen. It's already been agreed to. We
just need to come to terms with that and move on. <br>
<br>
Matt.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 23/02/2015 10:56 am, Rod Veith wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">My
2 page response has been sent to the Comms Alliance. I
find abhorrent the whole premise that ISPs have a role
to play in copyright enforcement prior to the issuing
of court orders!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Willing
to share and hope to swap responses off list.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Summary
of response: Totally against the scheme.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Rod</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"
lang="EN-US"> AusNOG [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net"
target="_blank">mailto:ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Rod Veith<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, 23 February 2015 8:50 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Paul Brooks'; <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net"
target="_blank">ausnog@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [AusNOG] "ISPs agree to
graduated warnings for pirates"</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Thank
you for the links.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">We
are preparing our reply and will send it to the
alliance.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Our
ISP business has not been approached about this scheme
either before or after this draft was produced by the
Communications Alliance.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Rod
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"
lang="EN-US"> AusNOG [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net"
target="_blank">mailto:ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Paul Brooks<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, 23 February 2015 8:14 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net"
target="_blank">ausnog@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [AusNOG] "ISPs agree to
graduated warnings for pirates"</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Noel -
assume there isn't anyone from CommsAlliance here to
address the concerns - reps from the comms industry on
this working group were Baker and McKenzie, Telstra,
Optus, M2, iiNet, IPStar, Verizon and VHA.<br>
Many of these concerns were probably raised during the
working committee meetings that brought this about -
but many of them would have been howled down by the
content industry.<br>
The group that put this together had a deadline to put
out a draft code that both sides could at least live
with - if they don't meet the deadline with a draft
that the service providers AND the content industry
can live with, then the Government was going to
'create' one themselves and impose it whether you
liked it or not - and most people figured that would
be worse. They still might.<br>
<br>
I agree, these are all really good comments. Now
everyone needs to get them in to Comms Alliance before
the end of the public coment period. Commenting in
here is like a discussion at the urinal in the pub -
satisfying, but doesn't get the vibe in to the people
that are making the decisions.<br>
<br>
This thing is now in a legislated process, in
accordance with the Telco Act:<br>
* 1 month public comment period to Comms Alliance<br>
* Comms Alliance committee consider all the public
comments and make changes as determined by the working
committee<br>
* if the changes agreed by the committee are big
enough there might need to be another public comment
period - or they might just reach out to people the
comment to run them through the changes<br>
* Comms Alliance presents the draft code to ACMA<br>
* ACMA open up a 2 month (might be 1 month) public
comment period<br>
* ACMA consider comments and suggestions made to ACMA<br>
* ACMA make it a mandatory code applicable to every
carriage service provider<br>
<br>
Even if its 'I don't agree with this, and I'm not a
member of Comms Alliance, and Comms Alliance shouldn't
be claiming to represent the industry when it only
represents its members and didn't ask AusNOG', write
your comment in to Comms Alliance.<br>
Even better, suggest specific changes to words and
processes. These are required to be addressed by the
committee, to a level that a comment like 'this is
screwed up I don't agree' won't be.<br>
<br>
So please please please - everyone, on behalf of your
service provider of employment, or as an interested
individual, follow the public comment instructions at
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.commsalliance.com.au/Documents/public-comment"
target="_blank">http://www.commsalliance.com.au/Documents/public-comment</a>
and let the Committee know what changes you would like
to see in and out of this draft code:</p>
<h4>Want to submit a comment on a draft document?</h4>
<p>You can use the <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.commsalliance.com.au/Documents/public-comment/submit-comments"
target="_blank">Submit Comments form</a> to submit
your comments via email or go to the <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.commsalliance.com.au/contact_us"
target="_blank">Contact Us</a> webpage to obtain
other contact methods such as by post or fax.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">All submissions received will be
made publically available on the Communications
Alliance website unless the submitter requests
otherwise.</p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<h3>Copyright Notice Scheme Industry Code</h3>
<p><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.commsalliance.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/47570/DR-C653-2015.pdf"
target="_blank">DR C653:2015 (709 KB)</a></p>
<p>The Copyright Notice Scheme Industry Code creates a
Copyright Notice Scheme through which residential
fixed internet users who are alleged to have
infringed copyright online will receive an
escalating series of infringement notices designed
to change their behaviour and steer them toward
lawful sources of content. The Scheme has a strong
emphasis on public education and does not contain
explicit sanctions against internet users, but does
provide for a ‘facilitated preliminary discovery’
process through which ISPs can assist Rights Holders
who may decide to take legal action against
persistent infringers.</p>
<p>Information on the Working Committee which revised
the Code, including the Terms of Reference can be
found <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.commsalliance.com.au/Activities/committees-and-groups/wc66"
target="_blank">here.</a></p>
<p><strong>PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES AT 5.00 P.M.
ON (<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://australia.gov.au/about-australia/our-country/time"
target="_blank">AEDT</a>) 23 March 2015.</strong></p>
<p>Please note that all submissions received will be
made publically available on the Communications
Alliance website unless the submitter requests
otherwise.</p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr align="center" size="3" width="100%"></div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Even if you just cut'n'paste the comments made in here
in the past day.<br>
<br>
All comments are required to be considered by the
committee, and the more people that provide comments,
the more they know the level of feeling behind it.<br>
<br>
<br>
Paul.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 22/02/2015 2:20 PM, Noel Butler wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p>Absolutely agree, their intention might be well
meaning, but there is too many holes in it, perhaps
someone from comms alliance here would like to address
these concerns?</p>
<p>On 22/02/2015 12:37, Damien Gardner Jnr wrote:</p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #1010ff
1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It did seem a little one-sided
there. It's all well and fine to say the process
on the Rights Holder side must be certified, but
there was no documented recourse if it should be
found that the Rights Holder was telling furfies.
For example, AFAIAC, should the Rights Holder be
found to be making false allegations, the ISP
should have the right to blacklist them and never
deal with them again. </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Seems like the Account Holder
needs some recourse BEFORE the Final Notice,
also. For example, if the Account Holder is a
household with 4 teenagers, AND lots of visiting
friends, well, they have no way to tell who may
have done it, so there needs to be a way to come
back to the ISP and say 'Sorry, this was NOT me,
nor was it someone I can identify, so please
cancel this notice'.</p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I don't like the
requirement for the ISP to send out the Final
Notices via registered post, without there
being some way to recoup that cost. Automated
emails are all well and fine. But once you
have to have someone print, fold, and stuff a
letter, walk to the post office, get a
tracking number, and then come back and enter
that number into a system, that notice just
cost you $30 to send. And then later when
someone needs to audit that process because
there was a failure in the system (The
accounts junior that walked to the post office
mixed up two of the tracking numbers), that
notice then just cost you another $200+ in
developer time.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Seems to be putting a LOT
of cost and administrative overhead on the
ISP's, for NO benefit to ISP's or the
community. All the benefit is on the Rights
Holders. Perhaps a $10-20 per processed
infringement notice incoming from the Rights
Holders would be a good cost offset for the
effort involved?</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
</p>
<pre>_______________________________________________</pre>
<pre>AusNOG mailing list</pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
/* Matt Perkins
Direct 1300 137 379 Spectrum Networks Ptd. Ltd.
Office 1300 133 299 <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:matt@spectrum.com.au" target="_blank">matt@spectrum.com.au</a>
Level 6, 350 George Street Sydney 2000
PGP/GNUPG Public Key can be found at <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://pgp.mit.edu" target="_blank">http://pgp.mit.edu</a>
*/
</pre>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog"
target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
/* Matt Perkins
Direct 1300 137 379 Spectrum Networks Ptd. Ltd.
Office 1300 133 299 <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:matt@spectrum.com.au">matt@spectrum.com.au</a>
Level 6, 350 George Street Sydney 2000
PGP/GNUPG Public Key can be found at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://pgp.mit.edu">http://pgp.mit.edu</a>
*/
</pre>
</body>
</html>