Pastebin launched a little side project called VERYVIRAL.com, check it out ;-) Want more features on Pastebin? Sign Up, it's FREE!
Guest

Raw Notes from INET New York (2012-11-15)

By: a guest on Nov 15th, 2012  |  syntax: None  |  size: 23.54 KB  |  views: 426  |  expires: Never
download  |  raw  |  embed  |  report abuse  |  print
Text below is selected. Please press Ctrl+C to copy to your clipboard. (⌘+C on Mac)
  1. Raw Notes from INET New York (2012-11-15)
  2. The Copyright Alert System Public Forum
  3. http://www.internetsociety.org/events/inet-new-york
  4.  
  5. Acronyms and Links
  6. ISOC - Internet Society (who is hosting the event)
  7. CCI - Center for Copyright Information (who are running CAS)
  8. CAS - Copyright Alert System (the 6-strike program)
  9.  
  10. People
  11. [PB] - Paul Brigner - ISOC (internetsociety.org) North American Director
  12. [DS] - David Solomov? - ISOC NY Chapter Rep
  13. [KK] - Konstantinos Komaitis - ISOC Policy Advisor
  14. [DM] - Declan McCullagh - CNET Political Correspondent (moderator)
  15. [JL] - Jill Lesser - CCI Director
  16. [VS] - Victoria Sheckler - RIAA
  17. [BS] - Ben Sheffner - MPAA
  18. [RW] - Ronald Wheeler - Fox Entertainment
  19. [LH] - Link Hoewing - Verizon
  20. [FL] - Fernando Laguarda - Time Warner Cable
  21. [JJ] - Jeff Jarvis - Tow-Knight Journalism Prof
  22. [GS] - Gigi Sohn - Public Knowledge CEO
  23. [ML] - Molly Land - NY Law School Prof
  24. [AS] - Aram Sinnreich - Rutgers Comm Assist Prof
  25. [DS] - David Sohn - Center for Democracy and Technology Counsel
  26.  
  27.  
  28.  
  29. [PB] Today is about getting input from both people here and remote
  30.   Thank David Sominov for organize
  31.   Here for INET, like to start off by describing ISOC
  32.   <reads mission statement>
  33.   Join the internet society
  34.   55k member, 100 orgs
  35.   another INET tomorrow
  36.   this INET is different from normal broad topic INETs
  37.   here to discuss copyright system
  38.   uprescidented to have content and internet providers work together
  39.  
  40. [PB] here to address difficult questions head on
  41.   I worked for Verizon, then at MPAA
  42.   ISOC doesn't have a position in the topic, doing it as a service to the internet community
  43.   is about keeping you informed
  44.  
  45. [PB] Invite [DS] up
  46.  
  47. [DS] I'm from ISOC chapter NY
  48.   topic is 6 strike program today
  49.   IP is economic asset that is very valuable and must provide equal protection to all
  50.   Content with protections needs to be protected and enforced
  51.   Also must be implemented to minimize harm, must have due process, including recompense for false positives
  52.   Examples for time sensitive: whistle blower, natuaral disasters, ...
  53.  
  54. [PB] Thanks David,
  55.   Please tweet, #INETNY or #copyright
  56.   INET.backchannel.info
  57.  
  58. [PB] Intro [KK]
  59.  
  60. [KK] Thanks, in 2009, France intro'd Hadopie, big step in cutting off those who copyright
  61.   Others have done so, too, with differing degrees of implementation
  62.   Some public, some self-regulation
  63.   Some condemn has human right violations
  64.   One side: content producers: say infringment has significant impact on the economy
  65.   One side: consumers: say harms them to restrict
  66.   One side: tech companies, worried how it affects them
  67.   One side: ISPs,
  68.   EU rejected ACTA
  69.   Progress needs to have more discussion
  70.   5 telcos entered agreement with content holders
  71.   CAS private system to enforce copyrights by content
  72.   Doesn't explicitly cut off users
  73.   <lots of reading legal text>
  74.   market is supposed to bring a plan to bear
  75.   quotes that self regulator groups are better than gov regulation
  76.   other disagree with consern that private regulation may fail to protect democratic values
  77.   also consern that it doensn't offer due process and equal protection
  78.   ISOC believes that there needs to be discuss
  79.   Message also talked about in 2005 at ISOC conference
  80.  
  81. [PB] intro first moderator, chief political corrispondant to CNET [DM]
  82.   other moderator is jeff jarvis
  83.  
  84. [DM] two panels today
  85.   first is about how the system works
  86.   everyone in the first panel likes the system
  87.   Panel ([JL], going to be running CAS)
  88.  
  89. [JL] leader of CAS
  90.   background: most of career on internet side: AOL policy director (1996)
  91.   ended up at AOL Time Warner trying to meet in middle between content and distrobution brands of that company.
  92.   spent a lot of time trying to come together
  93.   I'm excited about what we're doing
  94.  
  95. [JL] where we are today: working for 15 months on implementation
  96.   want to get it right:
  97.   1) trying to use technical methodolgies that minimize the tagging of content that is copyrighted
  98.   1a) while content is out there looking, that the ISPs are protecting privacy of their subscribers when sending notices
  99.   2) came out of consumer advisory board, so want to go out and talk to consumers
  100.  
  101. [DM] Cut off, switch to another view
  102.   [VS] from MPAA, how does this content watchers work
  103.  
  104. [VS] methodolgies are not new, been doing it for over a decade (avail through CCI's website)
  105.  HOW: joining public P2P networks, and reading IPs of for those who share
  106.  
  107. [DM] how do they look at files
  108.  
  109. [VS] hash, and other combination of human and technical means
  110.   send notice to ISP, who then sends to user
  111.  
  112. [DM] Victoria (RIAA) [VS] also use the same methods?
  113.  
  114. [BS] we both use Mark Monitor methdology
  115.   download the shared file, run entire file it through human, then hash and match others
  116.  
  117. [DM] What if I change one bit
  118.  
  119. [BS] yes, that's right, changing bits will throw off
  120.  
  121. [DM] Ronald [RW] do you love it
  122.  
  123. [RW] Yes I love it, been doing it for many years, sending with high degree of confidence
  124.   under previous commercial arrangements been less restricted
  125.   now there is actually a share, so now having to reduce total number of notices
  126.  
  127. [DM] remeber that Verizon was standing up in court, should they be doing more?
  128.  
  129. [RW] that involved the subpoena section of DMCA, this is not
  130.  
  131. [DM] will any users ever be sued over this?
  132.  
  133. [VS] suing is not a part of this system, no one will get sued because of this
  134.  
  135. [JL] not going to make it any easier
  136.  
  137. [DM] Link from Verizon [LH], any due diligence when we recieve a notice?
  138.  
  139. [LH] yes, built in protections for the system, have independent check
  140.  
  141. [DM] who is independent check
  142.  
  143. [LH] 4-6 notices sent out, email and voicemail (1st and 2nd is email+voicemail)
  144.   3rd+4th is acknowledge (popup that you have to respond to)
  145.   5-6th level is tmp speed reduction (14 day advanced notice)
  146.   5th+ notice that has appeal ($35 fee if they say they can't afford it)
  147.  
  148. [DM] leaked AT&T docs say restriction to websites
  149.  
  150. [LH] ours is speed reduction, intended to get their attention
  151.  
  152. [DM] Fernando (TWC) [FL] similar response?
  153.  
  154. [FL] haven't seen ATT docs, but thanks to Constantinas for opening statement
  155.    each ISP has different implementation
  156.    1) notice phase
  157.    2) ack phase
  158.  
  159. [DM] is just web browser (port 80?)
  160.  
  161. [FL] just web browsing, cant affect others
  162.    3) last phase restricted browsing until they ack until
  163.  
  164. [LH] make a statement,
  165.   working on ITU meeting on multi-state, where privat orgs work out they can do things without goverment
  166.  
  167. [DM] how much time? 20min left?
  168.   what about VPNs and Tor? does this work?
  169.  
  170. [JL] so this program is not structured to try and catch serial pirates who know better
  171.   we're not trying to aim "low" but trying to catch people who are treating sharing as social norm
  172.   I thiknk that with a 6-alert system, that they can be educated on how to find legal means
  173.   not going to address large scale pirates
  174.   This is to make digital content to them in authorized way, hopefully will decrease P2P popularity
  175.  
  176. [DM] Law doesn't require that you sign up for this process? Why do this now?
  177.  
  178. [FL] Think it's important as educational manner,
  179.    important to work with stakeholders, otherwise it's tense and there's friction
  180.    This puts education first, gives us opportunity to work together
  181.  
  182. [LH] been doing this with others before, and we think this will work better and be more structured
  183.   have less confusion
  184.   be more private, doesn't revealed to content by ISP unless they appeal
  185.   couldn't have done that if we were still piecemeal
  186.  
  187. [DM] questions
  188.  
  189. guy1> Dave Berstean (board of ISOC)
  190.   can't believe what I'm hearing, I share wifi Phonara (wifi sharing network)
  191.   it's crucial that we don't affect this
  192.   question is: I'll have open wifi, I'm not responsible for what they do, what happens if I get a notice?
  193.   How do you proceed
  194.  
  195. [DM] then what to do ? [FL]?
  196.  
  197. [FL] thanks for business, it's inconsistent with our TOS to provide open wifi
  198.  
  199. guy1> what?!
  200.  
  201. [FL] you'll get notices, and if that happens 6 times
  202.  
  203. guy1> are you going to shut me down
  204.  
  205. [FL] this is not a termination program
  206.  
  207. [LH] once 6 times hits, we don't do anything, our duties are fulfilled
  208.  
  209. [JL] this is not part of the program, might have reconsider
  210.   once you get 6 notices, then throttled once, then get no more notices
  211.   about open wifi, TOS
  212.  
  213. guy2> Tim Sanders
  214.   I don't know of reliable techniques to do "popups" when most people are using SSL?
  215.   Also content industry abuses DMCA, so what assurances that it will not
  216.  
  217. [DM] lets do all questions then let
  218.  
  219. [DS] we have free wifi in nyc, why are we forcing people to lock down wifi?
  220.  
  221. guy3> Paul Geller (being sued by RIAA)
  222.   just heard 3 instances of applauding compromise on freedom of speech
  223.   what happens in instance of false positives, any penalization?
  224.  
  225. [DM] responses
  226.  
  227. [BS] have a methodolgy study on guy 3 question, so that shouldn't happen
  228.  
  229. guy3> what about detecting fair use?
  230.  
  231. [DM] under DMCA you were under
  232.  
  233. [BS] we are also in this system
  234.  
  235. [DM] let's get questions from internet
  236.  
  237. <...missed this question...>
  238.  
  239. [JL] this was groundbreaking work,
  240.  
  241. [DM] were others invited?
  242.  
  243. [VS] under umbrella of MPAA and RIAA, this was
  244.  
  245. guy4> only P2P networks?
  246.  
  247. [JL] yes, not others like filelocker,etc.
  248.  
  249. [JJ] not buying 6 strikes and then there's piece in the kingdom, what happens after 6
  250.  
  251. [LH] same as today, can sue
  252.  
  253. [JJ] obligated to use 6 notices first?
  254.  
  255. [LH] no
  256.  
  257. [VS] 4-5 years since we were suing users, and we don't plan on doing it again
  258.  
  259. [LH] we want to see if this works
  260.  
  261. [DM] any recompense for false positives?
  262.  
  263. [VS] if you get 5th, if you file appeal, the imposition of the measure stops (no more progress)
  264.  
  265. [LH] reset to 0 if you win
  266.  
  267. [DM] UofIdaho said, no way for public to know if the system is working
  268.  
  269. [VS] focus of complaints are about transparncy, we have done this
  270.   -release of tech analysis
  271.   -appeals progress
  272.  
  273. guy7> Kevin peter
  274.   can you describe appeals process?
  275.  
  276. [JL] run by american arbitration assoc.
  277.   most experience with independent dispute resolution
  278.   working with us to create online filing for us
  279.   can specify reason, pay $35 with online payment
  280.   they will look at that appeal and issue a decision
  281.   if alert is invalidated, refund and account set to 0
  282.  
  283. [PB] need to switch panel
  284.  
  285. [DM] jeff jarvis is next panel [JJ], thanks to panel for being here
  286.  
  287. =============================================
  288.  
  289. [PB] thanks [DM]
  290.  
  291. [JJ] I'm jeff jarvis (also guy6)
  292.   the views of this group are not as obvious as last group
  293.  
  294. [GS] on board of CCI
  295.   don't think this is the devil's spawn
  296.   these have been going on for a long time, now it's a big structure that is more transparent
  297.   I do have some conerns, but this is a lot better than it was before
  298.   after SOPA/PIPA, thought there was a role for an advisor to make sure that consumers were protected
  299.   I've been beating Jill (prev5), to be make this more transparent
  300.   going to want to get data records released after program gets started
  301.   CCI has pledged to have another independent analysis done on tech methodology
  302.   What I want changed:
  303.   -not crazy about appeal fee, was $50
  304.   -don't like open wifi excuse (lock it down), there are legit uses
  305.   -want more proof from owners that they own the content
  306.   -during appeals, need to allow all defenses
  307.   We need to make content start to do the right thing and adapt
  308.   I see a lot upset in the room, need to put that negative energy into something positive
  309.   -what about false positives, we need punishment for those abuses
  310.  
  311. [ML] I'm Molly, my background is in international law
  312.   concerns:
  313.   -privacy, deep packet inspection, etc.
  314.   -cost of program: ISPs will incur cost that is passed on to consumers?
  315.   -sanction: posibility that access might be terminated, even if temporarily
  316.      what we focu on
  317.   said on the previous panel, at end of 6th notice, then that's it and no termination
  318.   need to get that in writing, and detail out specifics of that
  319.   closing:
  320.   -human rights concerns doesn't mean you can't construct copyright system
  321.   -but problems associated with termination is something we need to focus on
  322.   we need to take termination off the table, helps aliviate concerns about safety
  323.     also helps with due process
  324.   think about accuracy, not tech, but legal accuracy
  325.     burden is now on the user
  326.     if person is subject to mitigation and don't have $35 or the time or resources, it's a significant burden
  327.     so putting burden on user is harmful
  328.  
  329. [AS] concerns mostly already addressed by others
  330.   but there is a civil liberties issues
  331.   -freedom of speech: UN has said that internet is human right
  332.     -over the last years: DMCA has been mis-applied, especially for political speech
  333.   This seems to err on the side overprotection
  334.     -dolphin/tuna analogy, how many dolphins are you willing to accept?
  335.  
  336.   Everyone is concerned about privacy, but older/poorer don't adjust privacy settings
  337.   So this tuna net only catches poorer/older people
  338.   Savvy people are going to use VPNs, so only disadvantages are going to get caught
  339.   This widens the gap between info-haves and info-have-nots
  340.   But this is very mild compared to
  341.   But this is not going to work, in terms of social aspect
  342.     -in previous research, I published report on filesharing effects (Napster helps)
  343.        -said that this was a hydra, with many heads coming back
  344.   If this does anything, it will make unlicensed content more prelevant
  345.   Also a bad bargin for ISPs, will cause gov to step in
  346.   Will cause to raise the bar of gov policy, and lead to more higher policies in future
  347.  
  348. [DS] I'm hopeful that it will play a positive role
  349.   impression that off to a good start, but will have to wait and see how it plays out in practice
  350.   Positive potential
  351.   -shared interest to enforce copyrights without collateral damage
  352.     ex. infrastructure effects, harms on new tech, privacy
  353.   Long term challenge, to get users to not want to infringe
  354.   -education an help doing that
  355.   Ideally we get people to get to the point where they don't want to infringe
  356.   Risks:
  357.   -if focus were to evolve away from education and to punishment, that would cause concern
  358.  
  359. [AS] It's open to that possibility
  360.  
  361. [DS] Which is why we need to watch it, and big concerns if it happens.
  362.   Is it really easy to give notice to a person?
  363.   How effective in avoiding false positives?
  364.     -system is said to focus on whole works, not fragments
  365.   How effective will systems safeguards be? will be simple and practical enough to do?
  366.   How will system track how well it's working? Will false positives be fed back into system to improve it over time?
  367.   -successful appeals should influence system at the front end
  368.   Final thing:
  369.   -consistent with edu purpose, we will be providing info to people, that should be fair and balanced
  370.   -if data were to be slanted, org would lose ability to be a credible source
  371.  
  372. [JJ] I'll note: what I hear at low level: trust problem
  373.   -users don't trust content, content doesn't trust users
  374.   -human rights question
  375.   -don't like a system where content tell users they have to do what they don't want to do
  376.     -that doesn't sound like a winning plan
  377.   New tech: news as embeddable articles to go with the flow of sharing while still retaining control
  378.     why not focus on that?
  379.  
  380. guy1> Michael ? of patent blogs
  381.   Consumers get advertising, and don't care who gets paid
  382.   Why not go after advertising? That's how the internet is monetized.
  383.  
  384. [JJ] this doesn't address that
  385.  
  386. [GS] this addresses P2P, which doesn't make money
  387.  
  388. [AS] not addressed by the policy because bittorrent isn't commercial
  389.  
  390. [GS] on topic of Trust
  391.   -wagging finger isn't effective, and makes huge trust gap
  392.  
  393. guy2> ideal world, we should have open system without infringement
  394.   Gigi said that we need to work towards a positive system
  395.   Burden is on people who have lack of resources, what's a way that people can be held accountable without putting burden on them?
  396.  
  397. [AS] 1) bill in Brazil that would punish companies for false positive on fair use
  398.   -so that exists
  399.   2) Issa has pushed acts, trying to make internet bill of rights, where can't go passed threshold
  400.   3) Industry has had ideas about business models based on non-restrictive systems, but have imploded when tried to implement them
  401.     -example: chorus, blanket license on ISP passed onto consumer, but got torpedoed by content
  402.     So biggest obsticle to content to profit in open age is themselves
  403.  
  404. [GS] go to internetblueprint.org, have two ways to respond to copyright abuse
  405.   However, don't see this system as one where you have to lawyer up
  406.   Trying to make appeals process as easy as possible.
  407.   Used to not have an appeals process.
  408.   Let's see how this thing is implemented before passing judgement.
  409.  
  410. [ML] on Trust, this is private process, which harms trust
  411.   so we need public oversight and limits to help trust
  412.   also relevant to other topics on network management, so need to set a baseline
  413.   concerned that the fact that there are stated educational goals, and then adding mitigation procedure detracts from that goal
  414.   if really educational, it shouldn't have mitigation
  415.  
  416. [JJ] we (consumers) need to have discussion about principle
  417.  
  418. guy3> shocked disbalance in discussion
  419.   go back to privacy issue
  420.   talking about stealing property, on other hand, users are giving away information and that information has value
  421.   issue of trust has to have balance
  422.  
  423. [DS] on privacy need to have discussions about how information is transferred
  424.  
  425. [JJ] i brought that up before, if I say something earlier, is that discoverable later on?
  426.  
  427. [VS] no, appeals stuff is only for that, according to MOU
  428.  
  429. [JJ] assured?
  430.  
  431. [VS] yes
  432.  
  433. =============================================
  434.  
  435. [PB] ok, final panel is everyone, turn it over to [KK]
  436.  
  437. [KK] each one able to make concluding remarks (5min each)
  438.   I picked up one thing: trust
  439.   how can we trust the system?
  440.  
  441. [LH] dialogue in 2nd panel was very good, understand the trust point
  442.   things we build in
  443.   1) transparency, we had another independent work
  444.   2) put in advisory board, which should help
  445.   3) regular reviews
  446.   so give us some time to earn the trust
  447.   How to reach people concerns
  448.   -popup is there to try and make a best effort to contact people, but no perfect system
  449.   Again, trying to build this to be as fair as we could and educate people
  450.  
  451. [FL] This is process of getting feedback, want to get it right
  452.   we are here trying to make it work, we are trying to learn
  453.   MOU (spec) provides for revisions
  454.   this is an educational program, not trying to target extreme cases
  455.   trying to educate cultural change that is a hard thing
  456.   at then at end of process, we're not planning on terminating customers
  457.   Not constructive to talk in terms of pirates and thieves, but also don't try to
  458.     condemn businesses trying to make decisions in their best interest
  459.  
  460. [JL] level of skepticism is not surprising nor unwarranted
  461.   please hold judgement until program is up and running
  462.   asking for trust is not best way to proceed, but please wait and watch
  463.   CCI, org that is leading this
  464.   Two mandates 1) get CAS running
  465.   2) Engage in productive education effort, how to be an ethical user of the internet
  466.   CCI wants to educate kids, too, about creativity and control
  467.  
  468. [BS] Trying to make it work
  469.   will we make mistakes, possibly, but will work to correct those mistakes
  470.   we announced today www.whymusicmaters.com
  471.  
  472. [BS] Mashups - this system does not involve mashups, won't catch mashups
  473.   Deep packet inspection - this has nothing to do with that, only looks at shared content on P2P networks
  474.   Privacy - won't know names in the system, only know the IP address
  475.     -if file an appeal, still won't know name, except if the user say that content gave them authority (narrow scenario)
  476.  
  477. [RW] Necessary to have mitigation if program is education?
  478.   One of purposes of this program is to find out if that is a good point.
  479.   If doesn't have teeth, notices would be ignored? If does, would also be ignored?
  480.   We want to find out. Want to see that 1-2 notices is good enough to change behavior.
  481.   Don't trust the program, but wait and see.
  482.  
  483. [GS] ISP and content, they don't like to work in public, used to smokey rooms
  484.   This is not a typical commerical private agreement, but this is a pretty public implementation
  485.   that will have oversight.
  486.   When this thing kicks off, please let me know if there are problems. That's why I'm here.
  487.   We need monitor it.
  488.   This thing is not going away, as much as many would like.
  489.  
  490. [ML] reiterate skepticism that this will work
  491.   bittorrent and others are so many, that trying to close down one channel isn't going to do anything
  492.   like dutch boy sticking finger in dyke
  493.   you guys haven't addressed this issue, because you can't
  494.   the only way you can actually stop it is severe litigation procedures
  495.   and you haven't chosen to do that for political reasons
  496.   you say this is educational focused, but I'm not clear that the consumer is not educated
  497.   when I ask about remixes, I get huge deep thoughts about emerging issues around copyright
  498.   copyright issues are now higher in visibility than ever before,
  499.   so a policy that is built around educating your right/wrong, it's going to fail
  500.  
  501. [DS] see this as a good faith effort to try and do something
  502.   good sign that they even brought in Gigi on the advisory board, they could have not
  503.   as far as education focus
  504.   -worth thinking about what success would look like for this program
  505.   -I agree that many people won't be affected by the notices
  506.   -but I think that there will also be a substantial offset in people who don't know
  507.     -so I guess the program only goes to those folks
  508.  
  509. [JJ] I'm not sure we know what we want from the Internet
  510.   Should we not be in the content business, but instead the service business?
  511.   I don't make lots of money on books, I make money on speaking?
  512.   We see people like me finding new business models, that take advantage on abundance over scarcity
  513.   I challenge you to be positive to find ways to
  514.     -you will disrupt your current models
  515.     -if you give your fans the ability to buy things, I have to believe that they will buy it
  516.  
  517. [KK] thanks and open up floor
  518.  
  519. <Me asking a question> why aren't video game publishers on this panel, too?
  520.   What about talking with them about things they've tried like Steam from Valve
  521.   that's very successful at distributing proprietary content?
  522.  
  523. [VS] we work with ESA, and we do tons of digital content
  524.  
  525. guy7> regarding sharing? sharing or downloading?
  526.   if you're just downloading (no seeding) is that a defense
  527.  
  528. [BS] Mark Monitor looks at your shared folder
  529.  
  530. guy7> that's inaccurate of how bittorrent works
  531.  
  532. [VS] it looks at connections in the swarm
  533.  
  534. guy7> if I set seeding to zero, you will be undetected?
  535.  
  536. [BS] yes
  537.  
  538. [DS] you pay people to destroy your content
  539.   alienating
  540.  
  541. [RW] with all due respect, we know best about our own business model
  542.    if we see a way to make shareholders, we'll do those things
  543.  
  544. [JJ] oh come on,
  545.    you're dismissing
  546.  
  547. <20sec of argument between [RW] and [JJ]>
  548.  
  549. [DS] content is now asking people to restrict
  550.   no one has brought up copyright implementation (lifetime+70 years)
  551.  
  552. [KK] please try to limit comments to CAS
  553.  
  554. [GS] copyrightblueprint.org
  555.  
  556. guy8> ISPs looking at packets
  557.  
  558. panel> no
  559.  
  560. guy8> how not to violate wiretap laws
  561.  
  562. RIAA> on P2P, my
  563.  
  564. guy8> so combobulator will wiretap?
  565.  
  566. [BS] that's not how this works
  567.  
  568. guy8> we need to overthow this government
  569.   <Nazi references>
  570.  
  571. [PB] This has been an educational event. we are going to be archiving this and subtitled.
  572.   Want to follow up after this system is in place, and then see how it's going.
  573.   Thanks all for being here.
clone this paste RAW Paste Data