Advertisement
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up,
it unlocks many cool features!
- 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.
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement