[AusNOG] Legal Challenge To Meta Data Laws

[Paul Wilkins]

The BSA relies on the Telco Act for its definition of service provider. In
the final analysis, it comes down to whether you provide communications
over directed electromagnetic radiation.

My reading is, if you provide a copper or fibre service AND higher layers,
OR you put an IP on a CE, it's beyond dispute you are a service provider
and have data retention requirements. Beyond this, it's dependent what CAC
can bully you into.

Keep in mind:
CAC rulings on your DRIP are appealable to ACMA
The data retention cannot be extended to a named company. It can only be
extended to a type of service.

(I am not a lawyer. This is not expert advice)

Kind regards

Paul Wilkins


On 29 September 2015 at 09:34, Noel Butler <noel.butler at ausics.net> wrote:

> On 20/09/2015 15:03, Mark Newton wrote:
>
>> On 20 Sep 2015, at 1:18 pm, Noel Butler <noel.butler at ausics.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 17/09/2015 15:05, Mark Newton wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The FAQ on AGD’s website is not legislation.
>>>> Your opinion is not legislation.
>>>> The legislation only applies to carriers and ISPs.  People providing
>>>> "Email, VoIP, etc” who aren’t carriers or ISPs are out of scope.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The CAC we hope makes their determinations based on the legislation
>>>
>>
>> The CAC doesn’t make determinations, they make suggestions.
>>
>> Courts make determinations.
>>
>> some here, like myself have been told Email must be retained regardless
>>> of if your an ISP/Webhost if your storage is in Australia, everyone will
>>> read it the way they want Mark, clearly like you do, but your opinion
>>> doesn't matter if it differs from the CACs, since they are the governing
>>> body of this mess.
>>>
>>
>> No, they aren’t. They’re just another body of particularly unskilled
>> and inexpert opinion.
>>
>> You seem absolutely determined to retain data that you don’t need to
>> retain (or, at
>> least, you would be if you had any). That’s your decision, I guess. I
>> don’t think
>> anyone else in this forum is going down the same road as you.
>>
>>   - mark
>>
>
> Hi Mark,
> I agree they have no idea, as per my previous to Ross, but they are
> enforcing the law and so there word has to be taken until its ruled invalid
> after being challenged by someone with deeper pockets than you or I.
>
> (as per top para to Ross, please reply to list, not direct, else you might
> not get any reply for another 10 days :)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150929/3cf2c29b/attachment.html>