ISOC-NY ran a half day conflab on 6 strikes (which incidentally - and for reasons that escape me - is a name the Copyright Alert System perpetrators wish would not be used) last November 15.
A full archive is available at http://isoc-ny.org/p2/4527 On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Jason Baugher <ja...@thebaughers.com>wrote: > We don't do content inspection. We don't really want to know what our > customers are doing, and even if we did, there's not enough time in the day > to spend paying attention. When we get complaints from the various > copyright agencies, we warn the customer to stop. When we hit a certain > number of complaints, its bye-bye customer. > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jeroen Massar <jer...@unfix.org> wrote: > > > On 2012-12-04 11:51, Nick B wrote: > > > In a related note, I wonder if the six-strike rule would violate the > > ISP's > > > safe harbor, as it's clearly content inspection. > > > > As performed in France, what happens is that some copyright owner > > contacts the ISP that IP address a.b.c.d had accessed/served copyright > > infringing data at date/time dd-mm-yyyy HH:mm providing some kind of > > detail on how they figured that out. > > > > That report is a 'strike' and gets forwarded to the user. > > > > If that then happens 6 times they are blocked. > > > > The ISP as such does not do any content inspection. > > > > It is though assumed that some ISPs simply count bytes and that they do > > some investigation themselves when you reach a certain bandwidth > > threshold (it seems to correlate that copyright infringers are > > downloading a lot more than normal webbrowsing users...) > > > > Greets, > > Jeroen > > > > > > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
