<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 23/06/2015 5:23 AM, Paul Wilkins
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAMmROT+q=Owtk2pTmGBePOxhMqKOG8tiC0Ta5nf2zR0O8EC6NQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>Really it's not that bad. They've seen fit to allow for a
          test of reasonableness. Perhaps after the data retention
          shenanigans, they're waiting for the dust to settle. This act
          will make for some interesting discussions around what is
          reasonable: if it's not reasonable to withdraw routes, and
          it's not reasonable to block IPs or do DPI, what else is
          there? I'm already looking forward to the first test case.<br>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    However, if *you* are the first test case, how do you plan to show
    to the court what you interpreted as reasonable, and how you tried
    to use reasonable means? The court order won't tell you what
    'reasonable' might mean, or what measures might be considered
    unreasonable. The content organisation that asked for the injunction
    certainly won't tell you.<br>
    <br>
    Situation: you are presented with an injunction to use 'reasonable
    steps to disable access' to the URL:<br>
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fileshare.eu/?movie=someblockbusterflick.mp4">http://www.fileshare.eu/?movie=someblockbusterflick.mp4</a>.<br>
    <br>
    Lets say <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.fileshare.eu">www.fileshare.eu</a> is hosted on AWS in all regions. <br>
    <br>
    Answer: What do you consider is going to be reasonable for your
    organisation to do to comply? and if you don't think what you will
    do will be effective in achieving the blocking, how do you propose
    to convince the judge that you did everything reasonable when the
    content industry brings you back to to the judge to tell her you
    failed to comply with the injunction?  How will you explain that you
    thought withdrawing routes or blocking IPs was not reasonable?<br>
    <br>
    (Its interesting that the requirement to redirect the access attempt
    to a splash-page identifying the block and the requestor of the
    block didn't make it into the final legislation. A site blocked in
    error still has no way of finding out they have been blocked, except
    for a puzzling drop in traffic to troubleshoot)<br>
    <br>
    Better have a plan in place for when the first injunction comes
    through the door and you find you are the first test-case.<br>
    <br>
    Paul.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAMmROT+q=Owtk2pTmGBePOxhMqKOG8tiC0Ta5nf2zR0O8EC6NQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div><br>
        </div>
        Paul Wilkins<br>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On 22 June 2015 at 18:34, Damian Guppy
          <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:the.damo@gmail.com" target="_blank">the.damo@gmail.com</a>></span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div dir="ltr">Given the impact this is going to have on
              ISP's I am surprised I haven't seen this discussed much on
              here. 
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>Maybe infrastructure upgrades to support this
                blocking can be rolled into the upgrades for Metadata
                retention. I am sure the legislation is pretty vague
                about how the blocking will need to happen (URL vs IP vs
                DNS).</div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/australian-senate-passes-controversial-antipiracy-websiteblocking-laws-20150622-ghuorh.html"
                  target="_blank">http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/australian-senate-passes-controversial-antipiracy-websiteblocking-laws-20150622-ghuorh.html</a><span
                  class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
                  </font></span></div>
              <span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>--Damian</div>
                </font></span></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"
              rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
            <br>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>