Cc-uk mailing list

["Christian Ahlert" <christian.ahlert AT oii.ox.ac.uk>]

For anybody interested in Collecting Socities and their approach to internet policy. The below is a post form the IP-list

Begin forwarded message:

From: Richard Forno <rforno AT infowarrior.org>

Date: July 5, 2005 11:40:32 AM EDT

To: Blaster <rforno AT infowarrior.org>

Cc: Dave Farber <dave AT farber.net>

Subject: GEMA asks German ISPs to poison DNS in the name of anti-

piracy efforts

  DNS Poisoning Requested From Providers by Rights Organisation

http://constitutionalcode.blogspot.com/2005/07/dns-poisoning-

requested-from-

providers.html

The German rights organisation for composers, lyricist and 

publishers, GEMA,

has asked 42 access providers to poison their DNS servers in order to 

block

sites that provide links to eDonkey files. In short, DNS poisoning 

obstructs

the process of converting a URL to a numeric IP address. The GEMA 

apparently

expects the access providers to configure their DNS servers so that

"inquiries by end-users are not passed to the correct server, but to an

invalid or another pre-defined side." The GEMA also demands that the

providers sign a testimony,with which they commit themselves to 

ensure full

blockage under a contractual penalty of 100.000 euro if any of their

customers can still reach the targeted site after July 25th.

There's a good reason for the GEMA to target access providers. These are

located at the end of the internet chain (source-ISP-"internet"-ISP-

user),

and usually fall within the (German) jurisdiction, which eases 

enforcement.

However, the effectiveness of this measure may be questioned: users can

still enter the numerical IP address of the sites (URL-IP address 

converters

are easily available on the net), and other DNS servers may be used. The

GEMA probably thinks that an average user may not be able to take these

steps. It also has high expectations of the ability of providers to 

block

the sites, or at least of providers in general, setting a huge sum of 

100

000 euro for failure to comply.

The providers in question are still doing their legal evaluations of the

request, or have said right out not to comply, because the GEMA is 

not the

kind of judicial instance that can set these kinds of demands. They're

considering to bring GEMA's actions to court, in order to see if GEMA 

has

any standing. This question, and GEMA's actions that propel it, are a 

sign

of the times: private parties (rightholders) seeking direct enforcement

through private parties (ISPs), stripping down the constitutional 

protection

of speech from the largest (third) private party (users).

In the Pennsylvania child pornography case, slightly reminiscent of this

one, new legislation allowed the government to aks access providers 

to block

sites, using DNS poisoning amongst others. In that case there was a 

law to

challenge, constitutional restraints to invoke, a court to review the

pressure put on the public (government) - private (users) relationship.

While laws may be applicable in the German case, users could

"constitutionally" loose out if private demands are enforced by private

parties. A judicial review is appropriate here, if for one thing, to 

test

how far decisions to block the information flow can be pushed and taken

within the private realm. Even if there's arguably illegal activity

involved. Because there always is....arguably.

Am 1 Jul 2005 um 16:24 hat Andres Guadamuz geschrieben:

> Apologies for cross posting.

>

> This may be of interest:

>

> ----------------------------------------

>

> The Intellectual Property Charter:

> Special Debate - Time for action!

>

> RSA, 8 John Adam Street, London WC2N 6EZ

> Thursday 14 July at 6pm

>

> The media are full of stories of crises in copyright and patents, from

> teenagers being fined £3000 for downloading music that they believed

> to be legal to millions of people suffering from AIDS because they

> can't afford patented drugs.

>

> Should ideas be public or private? Should they be free to use or

> restricted? What is the future for copyright and how will this affect

> the creative industries, science and technology?

>

> The RSA s Intellectual Property Charter aims to promote a new way of

> ensuring the free circulation of ideas and knowledge for the benefit

> of society. It will provide a set of principles for a fair,

> transparent and user-friendly system in a sustainable creative

> economy.

>

> Following the near completion of the Charter, there will be a special

> debate on 14 July at the RSA in London with speakers including Ron

> Marchant, Chief Executive, Patent Office and John Naughton, professor

> of the public understanding of technology and columnist at The

> Observer. The debate will be moderated by John Howkins, Project

> Director, RSA Charter on Intellectual Property.

>

> This is a rare opportunity to question Ron Marchant who, as chief

> executive of the Patent Office, is responsible for shaping Britain¹s

> copyright and patent laws. And John Naughton, as author of A Brief

> History of the Future: Origins of the Internet, is well qualified to

> challenge existing copyright principles.

>

> To reserve your free place at the debate:

> email lectures AT rsa.org.uk or

> telephone 020 7451 6868

>

> www.theRSA.org/events

>  www.ipcharter.org

>

>

> -------------------------

> Andres Guadamuz

> AHRC Research Centre for Studies in

> Intellectual Property and Technology Law

> Old College, South Bridge

> Edinburgh EH8 9YL

>

> Tel: 44 (0)131 6509699

> Fax: 44 (0)131 6506317

> a.guadamuz AT ed.ac.uk

> http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrb/

> http://technollama.blogspot.com/

>

> _______________________________________________

> Cc-uk mailing list

> Cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org

> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-uk

Christian Ahlert

Oxford Internet Institute

www.oii.ox.ac.uk

www.ahlert.org