[AusNOG] Site Blocking Coming

[Paul Brooks]

Skeeve - Seems to me that 115A(3)(b) indicates the court action needs to explicitly
name each ISP that is going to be asked to implement anything, and 115A(4)(a) means
each ISP that is named must be notified that the application is being made, so you can
choose whether or not to participate in the court action or not. If you are not named
and notified, you won't be served the injunction, so you won't need to do anything.
These days, naming the top 5 ISPs is likely to cover a decent percentage of the userbase.

115A(5)f is something the judge has to take into account in deciding whether or not to
grant the injunction. An ISP that is named might be able to advise the judge on this
point, but an ISP that is not named doesn't have any say at that point - not your problem.

If you receive an injunction, your entire requirement to act is described in 115A(2) 
"Take reasonable steps to disable access to the online location".

Like most things the law describes the desired outcome, not the method. Its up to you.
If you are given a domain name or URL and your idea of 'reasonable step' is to block
the IP address, and there is a pile of collateral damage, then the ensuing publicity
might make the next application be considered differently. You might instead choose to
add a DNS hack within your network. Its entirely your individual call how you "disable
access", and it doesn't have to be 100% effective, just "reasonable steps". Whatever
that means.


On 23/11/2015 11:39 PM, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Re: http://www.cnet.com/au/news/village-roadshow-prepares-site-blocking-application-for-federal-court/
>
> So, how are ISPs planning to implement this blocking.
>
> How indeed are all ISPs even going to be told of the requirements?  Does the right
> holder have to contact every ISP in the country or are ISPs just supposed to know it
> has to happen?
>
> The
> legislation: http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r5446_third-reps/toc_pdf/15056b01.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf
>
> Some thoughts:
>
> - 115A(3)b. Does this mean the rights holder has to get an injunction against each
> an every CSP (ISP)?
>
> - 115A(5)f. How would anyone know (with a certainty) if other websites are hosted on
> the same IP address?
>
> Doe anyone else have thoughts/understanding on the mechanics on how this is supposed
> to work?
>
>
>
> ...Skeeve
>
>
> --
>
> Skeeve Stevens - The ISP Guy - Internet Provider SME
>
> Email: skeeve at theispguy.com <mailto:skeeve at theispguy.com> ; Cell: +61(0)414 753 383
>
> Skype: skeeve; Blog: TheISPGuy.com <http://theispguy.com/> ; Facebook: TheISPGuy
> <https://www.facebook.com/theispguy>
>
> Linkedin: /in/skeeve <http://www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve> ; Expert360: Profile
> <https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20151124/d95aa550/attachment.html>