John Linton ......due to the actions of a relatively small percentage of dishonest people. While this may not happen 'immediately' what is certainly going to happen is that every 'reasonable' ISP's costs are going to increase if new processes have to be introduced to deal with the issues currently coming in to effect in the UK and now being referred to in yesterday's AGE.
I mentioned the recent UK ISP/Copyright Protection Agencies initiatives in a blog some days ago. I read this 'follow up' in the Australian media earlier this morning:
http://business.theage.com.au/business/bid-to-have-isps-keelhaul-the-internet-pirates-20080803-3pd4.html
I found it interesting to see how the two ISP 'spokesmen' reacted to the reporter's questions on what their particular companies would do about any new 'initiatives' in Australia. I can only assume that their remarks had been approved by their legal departments and therefore represented a valid response - I doubt very much that any sensible person would offer such opinions had they not had them validated.
However I can't help wondering whether Telstra and iiNet have missed/avoided the point - either deliberately (more likely) or inadvertently (less likely) that the concepts they are decrying leave them open to some copyright protection agency seeking to use the courts to clarify some aspects of both the Telecommunications Act and the latest revisions to the Copyright Act(s)?
I found these statements by the Telstra and iiNet spokespeople:
"Mr Milne said problems with a three strikes policy that needed clarification included: customers not receiving warnings because they had changed their address, people being blamed for piracy because someone else has hacked in to their wireless network, and that the actions of one person could penalise a household."
AND:
"Michael Malone, chief executive of iiNet, described the three-strikes policy as "crazy", primarily because "ISPs aren't the ones who should decide what's legal or illegal, and neither should AFACT," he said."
to either deliberately or inadvertently miss the point that the copyright agency involved is not claiming that the ISP's CUSTOMERS are infringing copyright but that the ISP is doing so.
Right now, Exetel's legal advice is quite clear - we have no obligation under any extant Australian law to provide information about Exetel customers to third parties unless a relevant warrant is issued and we also have no obligation under any extant Australian law to determine the legality or otherwise of IP data streams passed through our networks.
Similarly we are not obliged to pass on infringement notices to customers - if the agency claiming infringement wishes to pursue that path they can apply to the appropriate court to issue a valid warrant for details to be provided.
Pretty clear and unequivocal - at least until now - the new tack being by the copyright agency (ignored by Milne and Malone as far as I can see) is that it seems to be claiming that the ISP is AIDING AND ABETTING - no need to pass on the notice it applies TO THE ISP - at least that's the way it can be construed.
The problem is not likely to go away based on those premises however and whatever now happens it's not going to be easy to address the sort of 'fall out' caused by the publicly expressed attitudes of some particularly silly users when they receive a copyright infringement notice, especially when they are so stupid that their views are publicly expressed on open forums, such as this:
"Prior to changing over to ISP XXX, I was with another ISP, and has(sic) been downloading files, in particular movies, via BitTorrent for a few years. Yet I have never received such e-mails.
I am giving serious thought about going back to my former ISP"
What is it possible to make of such comments? That the person concerned (and he/she is likely to be one of a large number) simply regards his/her routine downloading of copyright material is totally acceptable and shouldn't be hindered in any way? I think that's probably the only conclusion it's possible to reach.
I have previously commented on the UK initiative and its possible next step(s) and this particular person exemplifies why those steps will quite possibly be taken - in particular compiling a register of the actual telephone numbers of internet users who are serial copyright infringement culprits and making it accessible to all involved ISPs so this type of user simply can't move away from an ISP that disconnects his/her service to another ISP until he/she is caught again but that the other ISPs he/she seeks to move to will reject his/her application based on the "register".
Personally, and as someone with a measure of responsibility to continue to provide various communication services to tens of thousands of users around Australia, I have no interest in Exetel becoming some sort of 'vigilante' copyright enforcement agency - not only is it illegal but it is time consuming and bad for business generally. I certainly don't condone theft of any person's or entity's property by any means at any time. However neither do I consider it either my or Exetel's responsibility to write new laws or determine culpability based on laws that aren't enacted in Australia.
Having said that I do agree that it is long past time that parents of children who use the internet services they pay for to actually make themselves aware that their children are indulging in anti-social and quite likely criminal behaviour, and worse, inculcating their disregard for social responsibility and other people's property in to their future behaviour should take some serious actions in ensuring that their children don't continue to develop a criminal mindset.
If they don't then they may well live to regret their neglect of basic parental responsibilities.
In the mean time it will be interesting to see what now transpires in Australia - whether the UK (and French) initiatives are implemented in some form or other in Australia. Whatever happens only one thing is certain - the cost of providing ISP services is going to increase until some sensible resolution of the breach of copyright issues is reached.
It's the last full day of this, very pleasant, holiday and already the demands of business, via the actions of stupid and dishonest people, are encroaching on these last precious hours of 'freedom' - maybe I'll miss the plane tomorrow?