nanog mailing list archives
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
From: Jérôme Nicolle <jerome () ceriz fr>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 00:31:03 +0200
Hi Daniel, Le 06/08/2018 à 16:48, Daniel Corbe a écrit :
It doesn't work like that though. I can't just bitbucket DMCA takedown requests because I also provide people with cable TV service. That means I have content contracts and these contracts are all very specific about what I need to do to process DMCA takedown requests. I'm sure that they receive reports regularly from the companies they contract to do DMCA enforcment. Or maybe they don't and I have no idea what I'm talking about. But I'm still not going to put my content contracts at risk because I think my users would be even more pissed off if their cable TV packages were suddenly unavailable to them.
I'm very sorry to read that, as an ISP, you have to comply with a para-judicial process that puts you in charge of censorship. I'd like to think that you'd have some margin to let these "copyright holders" fuck-off when it comes to your mere-pipe services. But I guess it depends on the jurisdiction you're operating under. Providing IP services and CATV are two different things that should not be liable one to another. If you have any right to give them a finger, please, on behalf of our community, give it to them. If not, please work harder on denouncing those indecent contracts. Best regards, -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14
Current thread:
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes, (continued)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Rich Kulawiec (Aug 04)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Daniel Corbe (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes nanog (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Jérôme Nicolle (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Michael Hallgren (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes nanog (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes John Levine (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Daniel Corbe (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes nusenu (Aug 08)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Rich Kulawiec (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Daniel Corbe (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Jérôme Nicolle (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes John Levine (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Daniel Corbe (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Matt Harris (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes valdis . kletnieks (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Matt Harris (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes John Levine (Aug 07)