[AusNOG] So are iiNet condoning illegal piracy?

Wed Jun 11 13:51:53 EST 2014

Keeping this realistic.

What is an ISP?  How deep does this go?

We transit of TPG,  and we resell to our Cloud clients.  We have our own BPG. We have multiple layers of routers in our datacentre.

Assuming this “goes through”,  what will happen to “Cloud Providers”

Are TPG going to police us?  Are we going to Police our clients?

Do I need to setup some kind of Packet Inspection (Layer what?  3?  7? )

Keeping it real,  we going to have a situation of Germany,  PAPERS PLEASE!!!

How deep does this rabbit hole go?  Do I need to ban Torrent use on client’s VPS?  Because their probably doing something shady?  I’m going to lose clients….

[cid:Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_01.png]

Burt Mascareigne
Technician
Mob: 0414 450 962

[cid:Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_03.png]   [cid:Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_04.png]

Your Needs, Our Priority
From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Geordie Guy
Sent: Wednesday, 11 June 2014 13:31
To: mike at brassrazoo.net.au
Cc: <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] So are iiNet condoning illegal piracy?

There's an awful lot wrong with this.  Basically all of it.  And regardless of whether you're ready as a network operator to stand up and keep your AusNOG activities where they currently are (alternating between posting weird traceroutes to the list and asking if anyone near Skipton, VIC has a spare line card because yours just smoked up) rather than going where the copyright lobby wants them (posting to the list each day about how to keep the cost of issuing compliance notices down, asking the list where the best sparkling water is for the lawyers in the lobby, you know basically everything other than operating a network), then you need to know what's wrong with this and why.

Maybe you don't care.  Maybe as a network operator you are completely down with your duties migrating to meeting SLA's set by the Australian Screen Association for turning around threatening letters, but you need to know the facts. I run AS132710 and I'm angry as hell, but I know the facts and choose to be both angry and informed.

On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Mike Ryan - Brass Razoo Group <brassrazoo1 at gmail.com<mailto:brassrazoo1 at gmail.com>> wrote:

By opposing legislation that outlaws criminal activity (intellectual property theft)

Literally all of this is rubbish.

1)  There is no legislation to outlaw piracy and none is proposed.  "Intellectual property theft" is a bunch of silly words put together by silly people and are good for nothing other than light amusement.  The Australian Copyright Act only criminalises copyright infringement if it is accompanied by secondary factors such as commercial scale, circumventing a technological protection measure, advertising infringing works, or a bunch of other conditions.  Piracy is not illegal in Australia, nor will it become so, because the content industry and the government realise that the entertainment corporations creating criminal offences around it (without the excuse used overseas that there is a local movie and film industry whose profits are predicated on it), is a bad way to get your way.  This has been gone over countless times in response to the industry's billowing, spittle spreading mouthpieces and it's been vacated every time because it's simply not right.  Thankfully George Brandis' responses to Scott Ludlam in senate estimates lately about how Australia doesn't have illegality around individual copyright infringement played his hand further into open misere than it had ever been, and thankfully stopped me having to refer people to the Copyright Act, have them read all of it and comprehend it. Because it's not illegal, and because it can't feasibly be made illegal (without the industry vilifying consumers), the focus and attention is on ISPs who are seen to "facilitate" it by the lobbyists merely by providing services to their end users.  Ya know, what we're all in business for.

are iiNet giving a tacit nod to illegal activities?

3)  Not only are the activities not illegal, iiNet is not giving the tacit nod to them.  This is EXPRESSLY called out in chief regulatory officer Steve Dalby's blog post, and when iiNet handed Hollywood its fat, white, wrinkled butt in the High Court, the judge in the case specifically rejected that iiNet or any other provider has any incentive to give piracy the nod.  Pirates aren't good service provider customers, they are a threat to availability in non-SP private networks, pirates use all the available bandwidth using software which is not designed to co-exist with other network users and run the profitability of their resource allocation to the hilt.  You're last in the queue of people to accuse iiNet of thinking pirates are awesome and profitable, and everyone in the queue in front of you have been deliberately and specifically shot down in a burst of flames and a long trail of black smoke by either the people who operate the networks, or judges of the high court.

SP's and carriers are not liable for the behaviour of their clients.

Yet this is exactly what you are suggesting is the opposite of "giving the nod to piracy?"

iiNet should stick to providing shareholder value and ensuring system availability.

And you don't do that by acquiescing to a government regime's idea of what a system is available for, and the availability and reliability of a system injects right into the guts of earnings per share.  I

It's called "Rule of Law".

Congratulations, your final quip is so wrong it's the exact opposite of right and you look silly.

--

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140611/8774d81d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_01.png
Type: image/png
Size: 387 bytes
Desc: Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_01.png
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140611/8774d81d/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_03.png
Type: image/png
Size: 553 bytes
Desc: Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_03.png
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140611/8774d81d/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_04.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1026 bytes
Desc: Priority-Computer-Solutions_LOGO_04.png
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140611/8774d81d/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Side_Signature1.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1009 bytes
Desc: Side_Signature1.png
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140611/8774d81d/attachment-0003.png>