[AusNOG] "ISPs agree to graduated warnings for pirates"

Sun Feb 22 12:03:00 EST 2015

Hi Skeeve and all, I think these are all great questions and comments, but what I would like to know is how many people who are members of Commcom actually agree with this code ?

I would love to see an honest representation of this, from what I have read so far I can’t believe that many, if any, would actually agree to this, obviously I am wrong though because “all ISP’s” seem to agree according to the representation made by Commcom.

Just for the hell of it I decided to create a quick survey on surveymonkey, if you are interested in completing it I will send the results through to the list in a week so that everybody can see a real representation of what people think.

I hope I am not doing the wrong thing by doing this, If so I apologise, I feel that this is a very important matter and it would be extremely valuable to this community to know the real opinions of people.

Please pass the link onto anybody who you think deserves an opinion on this, which really is anybody in our industry IMHO.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/92BQ7KL

Regards
Paul

From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Skeeve Stevens
Sent: Sunday, 22 February 2015 8:33 AM
To: Peter Tonoli
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] "ISPs agree to graduated warnings for pirates"

So, the draft code is here:

http://www.commsalliance.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/47570/DR-C653-2015.pdf

A couple of questions.

- How does this affect businesses, companies, etc which has many users behind their connection.  Universities/Schools, Internet Cafes, corporate internet, public wifi, etc - which may or may not have the ability or detect what their users are doing.

What will be the penalties of businesses who can't identify the abuser?  Will a company be taken down because of a user?

Based on the definitions an 'Account Holder' is a natural person on Residential fixed internet account'.  Does does mean businesses (of any size) as end users are exempt? 

Will a family be taken down because of a childs actions? Is everybody affected by the actions of one/few?

What if the account holder ceases to be a customer of 'that' ISP?  With the trend of short term accounts, a user could move between an ISP every month at little cost... so as long as they rotate every month or two, this process is moot?

----Specific Questions----

3.9.2 - This seems like a VERY administratively costly method.  Why not just email?  Pop-Ups is VERY hard technically to do and potentially requires intercepting of communications.  Registered mail is VERY expensive in bulk and may end up costing a LOT of money.

3.10.3 - Why is the account holder paying? What if they can't afford to pay it?  I'd like to see the circumstances on which it can be waived? and how the panel will pay for the costs of evaluating the work involved.

3.10.8 - Are you suggesting that the panel has the power to ask ISPs to bypass privacy legislation?

3.10.10 - How will the panel handle people who have been hacked (virus, wifi, etc etc) and there defence is simply "We didn't do it" regardless of wether their connection actually did or not?

3.11 - What is ISPs don't? Or if they lose the information through systems failure, hacking, or mistake?

3.12.7 - Is the ISP required to be involved in the request? Who will pay for this?

3.12.10 - So you are saying that this is a paper tiger and accomplishes nothing but a bunch of emails and potential costs for ISPs?

4.1.3 - Equal? Why? Why are ISPs being forced to pay for the policing of this?  What mechanism will ISPs be forced to pay for it?  How much will panel members be paid for this? This could end up in hundreds of thousands of requests and be more than a full-time job.  How will it handle thousands of queries from account holders?

In the Process flow.3 - Match IPA to Service.  If an ISP does not track this information, are they able to ignore all requests?

If this is all so important... then why isn't the Comms Alliance building and hosting a platform to facilitate this process, paying for lawyers and so on?

There are a LOT of other things in this draft, but I think overall it is massively faulted and based on a bad foundation that ISPs are responsible at all for what their users are doing.  It shifts an admin burden to the ISPs that has cost implications which are unknown and could be very significant - if not business affecting - to smaller players.

If the ISPs of Australia do not fight back against this, many many small players (and bigger ones too) could be crippled by this process which the Comms Alliance has agreed to.

...Skeeve

--
Skeeve Stevens - The ISP Guy
Email: skeeve at theispguy.com ; Twitter: @TheISPGuy
Blog: TheISPGuy.com ; Facebook: TheISPGuy
Linkedin: /in/skeeve ; Expert360: Profile

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Peter Tonoli <peter at medstv.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:

Just to let you know, from the headline of this email, the whole ISP community has agreed to this.. ISPs agree to graduated warnings for pirates

Draft copyright infringement code published.

Australian internet service providers have agreed to implement a graduated warning scheme for users engaged in online copyright infringement, as part of a draft industry code issued today.

The Communications Alliance, the ISP representative body, today unveiled the draft code in order to meet the Government's April deadline for an agreed industry plan for self-regulation.

The federal government late last year warned ISPs and rights holders that it would enforce its own code for tackling online copyright infringement if the industry could not agree on one.

The ISP body published a draft version of the code today [ pdf] . It will apply only to fixed-line connections, and will see a series of escalated warnings issued to those suspected of downloading content such as films and TV shows without paying.

But the ISPs and rights holders are yet reach agreement on who will fund the scheme - the main reason similar talks broke down in 2012 - as well as how many notices will be sent during the first 18 months of the code's operation.

From: http://www.itnews.com.au/News/400747,isps-agree-to-graduated-warning-notices-for-pirates.aspx#ixzz3SFklq8dz
--

Peter Tonoli < peter at medstv.unimelb.edu.au > +61-3-9231-2399

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
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/20150222/699ceb1d/attachment.html>