Raw Notes from INET New York (2012-11-15)
The Copyright Alert System Public Forum
http://www.internetsociety.org/events/inet-new-york

Acronyms and Links
ISOC - Internet Society (who is hosting the event)
CCI - Center for Copyright Information (who are running CAS)
CAS - Copyright Alert System (the 6-strike program)

People
[PB] - Paul Brigner - ISOC (internetsociety.org) North American Director
[DS] - David Solomov? - ISOC NY Chapter Rep
[KK] - Konstantinos Komaitis - ISOC Policy Advisor
[DM] - Declan McCullagh - CNET Political Correspondent (moderator)
[JL] - Jill Lesser - CCI Director
[VS] - Victoria Sheckler - RIAA
[BS] - Ben Sheffner - MPAA
[RW] - Ronald Wheeler - Fox Entertainment
[LH] - Link Hoewing - Verizon
[FL] - Fernando Laguarda - Time Warner Cable
[JJ] - Jeff Jarvis - Tow-Knight Journalism Prof
[GS] - Gigi Sohn - Public Knowledge CEO
[ML] - Molly Land - NY Law School Prof
[AS] - Aram Sinnreich - Rutgers Comm Assist Prof
[DS] - David Sohn - Center for Democracy and Technology Counsel



[PB] Today is about getting input from both people here and remote
  Thank David Sominov for organize
  Here for INET, like to start off by describing ISOC
  <reads mission statement>
  Join the internet society
  55k member, 100 orgs
  another INET tomorrow
  this INET is different from normal broad topic INETs
  here to discuss copyright system
  uprescidented to have content and internet providers work together

[PB] here to address difficult questions head on
  I worked for Verizon, then at MPAA
  ISOC doesn't have a position in the topic, doing it as a service to the internet community
  is about keeping you informed

[PB] Invite [DS] up

[DS] I'm from ISOC chapter NY
  topic is 6 strike program today
  IP is economic asset that is very valuable and must provide equal protection to all
  Content with protections needs to be protected and enforced
  Also must be implemented to minimize harm, must have due process, including recompense for false positives
  Examples for time sensitive: whistle blower, natuaral disasters, ...

[PB] Thanks David,
  Please tweet, #INETNY or #copyright
  INET.backchannel.info

[PB] Intro [KK]

[KK] Thanks, in 2009, France intro'd Hadopie, big step in cutting off those who copyright
  Others have done so, too, with differing degrees of implementation
  Some public, some self-regulation
  Some condemn has human right violations
  One side: content producers: say infringment has significant impact on the economy
  One side: consumers: say harms them to restrict
  One side: tech companies, worried how it affects them
  One side: ISPs, 
  EU rejected ACTA
  Progress needs to have more discussion
  5 telcos entered agreement with content holders
  CAS private system to enforce copyrights by content
  Doesn't explicitly cut off users
  <lots of reading legal text>
  market is supposed to bring a plan to bear
  quotes that self regulator groups are better than gov regulation
  other disagree with consern that private regulation may fail to protect democratic values
  also consern that it doensn't offer due process and equal protection
  ISOC believes that there needs to be discuss
  Message also talked about in 2005 at ISOC conference

[PB] intro first moderator, chief political corrispondant to CNET [DM]
  other moderator is jeff jarvis

[DM] two panels today
  first is about how the system works
  everyone in the first panel likes the system
  Panel ([JL], going to be running CAS)

[JL] leader of CAS
  background: most of career on internet side: AOL policy director (1996)
  ended up at AOL Time Warner trying to meet in middle between content and distrobution brands of that company.
  spent a lot of time trying to come together
  I'm excited about what we're doing

[JL] where we are today: working for 15 months on implementation
  want to get it right:
  1) trying to use technical methodolgies that minimize the tagging of content that is copyrighted
  1a) while content is out there looking, that the ISPs are protecting privacy of their subscribers when sending notices
  2) came out of consumer advisory board, so want to go out and talk to consumers

[DM] Cut off, switch to another view
  [VS] from MPAA, how does this content watchers work

[VS] methodolgies are not new, been doing it for over a decade (avail through CCI's website)
 HOW: joining public P2P networks, and reading IPs of for those who share

[DM] how do they look at files

[VS] hash, and other combination of human and technical means
  send notice to ISP, who then sends to user

[DM] Victoria (RIAA) [VS] also use the same methods?

[BS] we both use Mark Monitor methdology
  download the shared file, run entire file it through human, then hash and match others

[DM] What if I change one bit

[BS] yes, that's right, changing bits will throw off

[DM] Ronald [RW] do you love it

[RW] Yes I love it, been doing it for many years, sending with high degree of confidence
  under previous commercial arrangements been less restricted
  now there is actually a share, so now having to reduce total number of notices

[DM] remeber that Verizon was standing up in court, should they be doing more?

[RW] that involved the subpoena section of DMCA, this is not

[DM] will any users ever be sued over this?

[VS] suing is not a part of this system, no one will get sued because of this

[JL] not going to make it any easier

[DM] Link from Verizon [LH], any due diligence when we recieve a notice?

[LH] yes, built in protections for the system, have independent check

[DM] who is independent check

[LH] 4-6 notices sent out, email and voicemail (1st and 2nd is email+voicemail)
  3rd+4th is acknowledge (popup that you have to respond to)
  5-6th level is tmp speed reduction (14 day advanced notice)
  5th+ notice that has appeal ($35 fee if they say they can't afford it)

[DM] leaked AT&T docs say restriction to websites

[LH] ours is speed reduction, intended to get their attention

[DM] Fernando (TWC) [FL] similar response?

[FL] haven't seen ATT docs, but thanks to Constantinas for opening statement
   each ISP has different implementation
   1) notice phase
   2) ack phase

[DM] is just web browser (port 80?)

[FL] just web browsing, cant affect others
   3) last phase restricted browsing until they ack until

[LH] make a statement,
  working on ITU meeting on multi-state, where privat orgs work out they can do things without goverment

[DM] how much time? 20min left?
  what about VPNs and Tor? does this work?

[JL] so this program is not structured to try and catch serial pirates who know better
  we're not trying to aim "low" but trying to catch people who are treating sharing as social norm
  I thiknk that with a 6-alert system, that they can be educated on how to find legal means
  not going to address large scale pirates
  This is to make digital content to them in authorized way, hopefully will decrease P2P popularity

[DM] Law doesn't require that you sign up for this process? Why do this now?

[FL] Think it's important as educational manner,
   important to work with stakeholders, otherwise it's tense and there's friction
   This puts education first, gives us opportunity to work together

[LH] been doing this with others before, and we think this will work better and be more structured
  have less confusion
  be more private, doesn't revealed to content by ISP unless they appeal
  couldn't have done that if we were still piecemeal

[DM] questions

guy1> Dave Berstean (board of ISOC)
  can't believe what I'm hearing, I share wifi Phonara (wifi sharing network)
  it's crucial that we don't affect this
  question is: I'll have open wifi, I'm not responsible for what they do, what happens if I get a notice?
  How do you proceed 

[DM] then what to do ? [FL]?

[FL] thanks for business, it's inconsistent with our TOS to provide open wifi

guy1> what?!

[FL] you'll get notices, and if that happens 6 times

guy1> are you going to shut me down

[FL] this is not a termination program

[LH] once 6 times hits, we don't do anything, our duties are fulfilled

[JL] this is not part of the program, might have reconsider
  once you get 6 notices, then throttled once, then get no more notices
  about open wifi, TOS 

guy2> Tim Sanders
  I don't know of reliable techniques to do "popups" when most people are using SSL?
  Also content industry abuses DMCA, so what assurances that it will not

[DM] lets do all questions then let

[DS] we have free wifi in nyc, why are we forcing people to lock down wifi?

guy3> Paul Geller (being sued by RIAA)
  just heard 3 instances of applauding compromise on freedom of speech
  what happens in instance of false positives, any penalization?

[DM] responses

[BS] have a methodolgy study on guy 3 question, so that shouldn't happen

guy3> what about detecting fair use?

[DM] under DMCA you were under 

[BS] we are also in this system

[DM] let's get questions from internet

<...missed this question...>

[JL] this was groundbreaking work, 

[DM] were others invited?

[VS] under umbrella of MPAA and RIAA, this was

guy4> only P2P networks?

[JL] yes, not others like filelocker,etc.

[JJ] not buying 6 strikes and then there's piece in the kingdom, what happens after 6

[LH] same as today, can sue

[JJ] obligated to use 6 notices first?

[LH] no

[VS] 4-5 years since we were suing users, and we don't plan on doing it again

[LH] we want to see if this works

[DM] any recompense for false positives?

[VS] if you get 5th, if you file appeal, the imposition of the measure stops (no more progress)

[LH] reset to 0 if you win

[DM] UofIdaho said, no way for public to know if the system is working

[VS] focus of complaints are about transparncy, we have done this
  -release of tech analysis
  -appeals progress

guy7> Kevin peter
  can you describe appeals process?

[JL] run by american arbitration assoc.
  most experience with independent dispute resolution
  working with us to create online filing for us
  can specify reason, pay $35 with online payment
  they will look at that appeal and issue a decision
  if alert is invalidated, refund and account set to 0

[PB] need to switch panel

[DM] jeff jarvis is next panel [JJ], thanks to panel for being here

=============================================

[PB] thanks [DM]

[JJ] I'm jeff jarvis (also guy6)
  the views of this group are not as obvious as last group

[GS] on board of CCI
  don't think this is the devil's spawn
  these have been going on for a long time, now it's a big structure that is more transparent
  I do have some conerns, but this is a lot better than it was before
  after SOPA/PIPA, thought there was a role for an advisor to make sure that consumers were protected
  I've been beating Jill (prev5), to be make this more transparent
  going to want to get data records released after program gets started
  CCI has pledged to have another independent analysis done on tech methodology
  What I want changed:
  -not crazy about appeal fee, was $50
  -don't like open wifi excuse (lock it down), there are legit uses
  -want more proof from owners that they own the content
  -during appeals, need to allow all defenses
  We need to make content start to do the right thing and adapt
  I see a lot upset in the room, need to put that negative energy into something positive
  -what about false positives, we need punishment for those abuses

[ML] I'm Molly, my background is in international law
  concerns:
  -privacy, deep packet inspection, etc.
  -cost of program: ISPs will incur cost that is passed on to consumers?
  -sanction: posibility that access might be terminated, even if temporarily
     what we focu on
  said on the previous panel, at end of 6th notice, then that's it and no termination
  need to get that in writing, and detail out specifics of that
  closing:
  -human rights concerns doesn't mean you can't construct copyright system
  -but problems associated with termination is something we need to focus on
  we need to take termination off the table, helps aliviate concerns about safety
    also helps with due process
  think about accuracy, not tech, but legal accuracy
    burden is now on the user
    if person is subject to mitigation and don't have $35 or the time or resources, it's a significant burden
    so putting burden on user is harmful

[AS] concerns mostly already addressed by others
  but there is a civil liberties issues
  -freedom of speech: UN has said that internet is human right
    -over the last years: DMCA has been mis-applied, especially for political speech
  This seems to err on the side overprotection
    -dolphin/tuna analogy, how many dolphins are you willing to accept?

  Everyone is concerned about privacy, but older/poorer don't adjust privacy settings
  So this tuna net only catches poorer/older people
  Savvy people are going to use VPNs, so only disadvantages are going to get caught
  This widens the gap between info-haves and info-have-nots
  But this is very mild compared to
  But this is not going to work, in terms of social aspect
    -in previous research, I published report on filesharing effects (Napster helps)
       -said that this was a hydra, with many heads coming back
  If this does anything, it will make unlicensed content more prelevant
  Also a bad bargin for ISPs, will cause gov to step in
  Will cause to raise the bar of gov policy, and lead to more higher policies in future

[DS] I'm hopeful that it will play a positive role
  impression that off to a good start, but will have to wait and see how it plays out in practice
  Positive potential
  -shared interest to enforce copyrights without collateral damage
    ex. infrastructure effects, harms on new tech, privacy
  Long term challenge, to get users to not want to infringe
  -education an help doing that
  Ideally we get people to get to the point where they don't want to infringe
  Risks:
  -if focus were to evolve away from education and to punishment, that would cause concern

[AS] It's open to that possibility

[DS] Which is why we need to watch it, and big concerns if it happens.
  Is it really easy to give notice to a person?
  How effective in avoiding false positives?
    -system is said to focus on whole works, not fragments
  How effective will systems safeguards be? will be simple and practical enough to do?
  How will system track how well it's working? Will false positives be fed back into system to improve it over time?
  -successful appeals should influence system at the front end
  Final thing:
  -consistent with edu purpose, we will be providing info to people, that should be fair and balanced
  -if data were to be slanted, org would lose ability to be a credible source

[JJ] I'll note: what I hear at low level: trust problem
  -users don't trust content, content doesn't trust users
  -human rights question
  -don't like a system where content tell users they have to do what they don't want to do
    -that doesn't sound like a winning plan
  New tech: news as embeddable articles to go with the flow of sharing while still retaining control
    why not focus on that?

guy1> Michael ? of patent blogs
  Consumers get advertising, and don't care who gets paid
  Why not go after advertising? That's how the internet is monetized.

[JJ] this doesn't address that

[GS] this addresses P2P, which doesn't make money

[AS] not addressed by the policy because bittorrent isn't commercial

[GS] on topic of Trust
  -wagging finger isn't effective, and makes huge trust gap

guy2> ideal world, we should have open system without infringement
  Gigi said that we need to work towards a positive system
  Burden is on people who have lack of resources, what's a way that people can be held accountable without putting burden on them?

[AS] 1) bill in Brazil that would punish companies for false positive on fair use
  -so that exists
  2) Issa has pushed acts, trying to make internet bill of rights, where can't go passed threshold
  3) Industry has had ideas about business models based on non-restrictive systems, but have imploded when tried to implement them
    -example: chorus, blanket license on ISP passed onto consumer, but got torpedoed by content
    So biggest obsticle to content to profit in open age is themselves

[GS] go to internetblueprint.org, have two ways to respond to copyright abuse
  However, don't see this system as one where you have to lawyer up
  Trying to make appeals process as easy as possible.
  Used to not have an appeals process.
  Let's see how this thing is implemented before passing judgement.

[ML] on Trust, this is private process, which harms trust
  so we need public oversight and limits to help trust
  also relevant to other topics on network management, so need to set a baseline
  concerned that the fact that there are stated educational goals, and then adding mitigation procedure detracts from that goal
  if really educational, it shouldn't have mitigation

[JJ] we (consumers) need to have discussion about principle

guy3> shocked disbalance in discussion
  go back to privacy issue
  talking about stealing property, on other hand, users are giving away information and that information has value
  issue of trust has to have balance

[DS] on privacy need to have discussions about how information is transferred

[JJ] i brought that up before, if I say something earlier, is that discoverable later on?

[VS] no, appeals stuff is only for that, according to MOU

[JJ] assured?

[VS] yes

=============================================

[PB] ok, final panel is everyone, turn it over to [KK]

[KK] each one able to make concluding remarks (5min each)
  I picked up one thing: trust
  how can we trust the system?

[LH] dialogue in 2nd panel was very good, understand the trust point
  things we build in
  1) transparency, we had another independent work
  2) put in advisory board, which should help
  3) regular reviews
  so give us some time to earn the trust
  How to reach people concerns
  -popup is there to try and make a best effort to contact people, but no perfect system
  Again, trying to build this to be as fair as we could and educate people

[FL] This is process of getting feedback, want to get it right
  we are here trying to make it work, we are trying to learn
  MOU (spec) provides for revisions
  this is an educational program, not trying to target extreme cases
  trying to educate cultural change that is a hard thing
  at then at end of process, we're not planning on terminating customers
  Not constructive to talk in terms of pirates and thieves, but also don't try to
    condemn businesses trying to make decisions in their best interest

[JL] level of skepticism is not surprising nor unwarranted
  please hold judgement until program is up and running
  asking for trust is not best way to proceed, but please wait and watch
  CCI, org that is leading this
  Two mandates 1) get CAS running
  2) Engage in productive education effort, how to be an ethical user of the internet
  CCI wants to educate kids, too, about creativity and control

[BS] Trying to make it work
  will we make mistakes, possibly, but will work to correct those mistakes
  we announced today www.whymusicmaters.com

[BS] Mashups - this system does not involve mashups, won't catch mashups
  Deep packet inspection - this has nothing to do with that, only looks at shared content on P2P networks
  Privacy - won't know names in the system, only know the IP address
    -if file an appeal, still won't know name, except if the user say that content gave them authority (narrow scenario)

[RW] Necessary to have mitigation if program is education?
  One of purposes of this program is to find out if that is a good point.
  If doesn't have teeth, notices would be ignored? If does, would also be ignored?
  We want to find out. Want to see that 1-2 notices is good enough to change behavior.
  Don't trust the program, but wait and see.

[GS] ISP and content, they don't like to work in public, used to smokey rooms
  This is not a typical commerical private agreement, but this is a pretty public implementation
  that will have oversight.
  When this thing kicks off, please let me know if there are problems. That's why I'm here.
  We need monitor it.
  This thing is not going away, as much as many would like.

[ML] reiterate skepticism that this will work
  bittorrent and others are so many, that trying to close down one channel isn't going to do anything
  like dutch boy sticking finger in dyke
  you guys haven't addressed this issue, because you can't
  the only way you can actually stop it is severe litigation procedures
  and you haven't chosen to do that for political reasons
  you say this is educational focused, but I'm not clear that the consumer is not educated
  when I ask about remixes, I get huge deep thoughts about emerging issues around copyright
  copyright issues are now higher in visibility than ever before,
  so a policy that is built around educating your right/wrong, it's going to fail

[DS] see this as a good faith effort to try and do something
  good sign that they even brought in Gigi on the advisory board, they could have not
  as far as education focus
  -worth thinking about what success would look like for this program
  -I agree that many people won't be affected by the notices
  -but I think that there will also be a substantial offset in people who don't know
    -so I guess the program only goes to those folks

[JJ] I'm not sure we know what we want from the Internet
  Should we not be in the content business, but instead the service business?
  I don't make lots of money on books, I make money on speaking?
  We see people like me finding new business models, that take advantage on abundance over scarcity
  I challenge you to be positive to find ways to
    -you will disrupt your current models
    -if you give your fans the ability to buy things, I have to believe that they will buy it

[KK] thanks and open up floor

<Me asking a question> why aren't video game publishers on this panel, too?
  What about talking with them about things they've tried like Steam from Valve
  that's very successful at distributing proprietary content?

[VS] we work with ESA, and we do tons of digital content

guy7> regarding sharing? sharing or downloading?
  if you're just downloading (no seeding) is that a defense

[BS] Mark Monitor looks at your shared folder

guy7> that's inaccurate of how bittorrent works

[VS] it looks at connections in the swarm
  
guy7> if I set seeding to zero, you will be undetected?

[BS] yes

[DS] you pay people to destroy your content
  alienating

[RW] with all due respect, we know best about our own business model
   if we see a way to make shareholders, we'll do those things
  
[JJ] oh come on,
   you're dismissing

<20sec of argument between [RW] and [JJ]>

[DS] content is now asking people to restrict
  no one has brought up copyright implementation (lifetime+70 years)

[KK] please try to limit comments to CAS

[GS] copyrightblueprint.org

guy8> ISPs looking at packets

panel> no

guy8> how not to violate wiretap laws

RIAA> on P2P, my 

guy8> so combobulator will wiretap?

[BS] that's not how this works

guy8> we need to overthow this government
  <Nazi references>

[PB] This has been an educational event. we are going to be archiving this and subtitled.
  Want to follow up after this system is in place, and then see how it's going.
  Thanks all for being here.