So you are looking for the language towards the complaintant, not the alleged offender. Got it. Just making sure. I am more than willing to share the language on our AUP. It was given to me by someone on this list anyway. I don't have any language either in the other direction.
-Ty -Ty On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:28 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm < thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > yes, just no dedicated dmca and mitigation policy set yet, we are getting > more and more of them > > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Ty Featherling <tyfeatherl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Steve do you have an AUP posted already? >> >> -Ty >> >> >> >> -Ty >> >> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:21 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> how much of this notice can a guy copy and use before google sends a >>> takedown notice. >>> >>> I really want to get our DMCA policy in place just to not have to worry >>> about being that little company they decide to make an example out of when >>> they figure out how to nail people on the firesticks >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Chuck Hogg <ch...@shelbybb.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I think we are going to start just following Google's take on DMCA >>>> notices. I would like ours to send the customer an email requiring the to >>>> go to a webpage in the next 7 days or be blocked. They will then be >>>> tracked watching a video of sorts that explains why they are watching this >>>> video. I would also explain that the company sending the complaint may >>>> want to settle, but it would be up to the customer to take whatever action >>>> they deemed appropriate. Further, I would tell the customer that I would >>>> not disclose their CPNI without a court order. >>>> >>>> This is what they send out.... >>>> >>>> >>>> [image: Inline image 1] >>>> >>>> And then they forward (Insert company here)'s complaint, in this case >>>> BMG. >>>> [image: Inline image 2] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Chuck >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I hit send too quickly. Here's how to NAT your customers to a range of >>>>> ports. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:IP/Firewall/NAT#Carrier-Grade_NAT_.28CGNAT.29_or_NAT444 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- >>>>> Mike Hammett >>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>>>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> *From: *"Mike Hammett" <af...@ics-il.net> >>>>> *To: *af@afmug.com >>>>> *Sent: *Monday, March 7, 2016 12:01:07 PM >>>>> >>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps our ticketing systems need an input box where we can copy + >>>>> paste the ACNS XML into and it files it with the correct customer? >>>>> >>>>> If you're NATing your customers, you should be NATing them to a >>>>> particular range so you can track them easier. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- >>>>> Mike Hammett >>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>>>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> *From: *"Jon Auer" <j...@tapodi.net> >>>>> *To: *"Animal Farm" <af@afmug.com> >>>>> *Sent: *Monday, March 7, 2016 11:32:01 AM >>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee >>>>> >>>>> I filled out that survey and then realized that most of the burden >>>>> comes down to the shi**y state of ticketing systems / backoffice tooling >>>>> (aside from not being able to file the registered agent form online). >>>>> >>>>> Pretty much all the DMCA notices come with ACNS XML. It's easy enough >>>>> to parse, open tickets on customers, and handle as automatically or >>>>> manually as you want. For a industry-to-industry self-policing mechanism >>>>> it's pretty painless. >>>>> >>>>> The only DMCA notice we've received *without* ACNS XML came from >>>>> CitiBank's SOC when one of our shared hosting customers got hacked and was >>>>> hosting a phishing page with their logo on it. >>>>> >>>>> Like most things ISPish the pain comes in the valley between when you >>>>> start and have so few customers that it's a novelty/doesn't take too much >>>>> time and when you have so many customers/it's enough of a pain that you >>>>> automate it. >>>>> Of course, when the valley is everything between some guy with like >>>>> 200 subs and Comcast there's a lot of people feeling the pain, but the >>>>> pain >>>>> shouldn't be there--we should be demanding that our back office >>>>> ticketing/billing venders provide ACNS parsing. >>>>> >>>>> We need to get our collective ducks in a row and manage DMCA well >>>>> enough that the rights-holders don't get any more bent out of shape and we >>>>> end up getting served with complaints that have teeth-subpoenas and >>>>> whatnot. >>>>> >>>>> Can't identify customers because NAT? >>>>> Log the port translations. ACNS includes port numbers. >>>>> Got people whining about costs of storing NAT logs? C'mon. Storage is >>>>> cheap. There's no such thing as free lunch and that's the cost of not >>>>> assigning public addresses to customers. >>>>> >>>>> I got 99 problems with DMCA but the takedown process (on the service >>>>> provider side) ain't one. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Daniel White <afmu...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> WISPA will be filling comments on the recent request for information >>>>>> from the US Copyright Office – specifically on the burden of DMCA. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Daniel White >>>>>> >>>>>> afmu...@gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590 >>>>>> >>>>>> Skype: danieldwhite >>>>>> Social: LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielwhite84>: Twitter >>>>>> <https://twitter.com/DanielWhite84> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown >>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 2, 2016 2:10 PM >>>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> And it should prove that we did everything possible to keep our hands >>>>>> clean. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 02, 2016 2:05 PM >>>>>> >>>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com >>>>>> >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So you actually made them follow up on the message with the copyright >>>>>> holder? That seems even more hardcore than disconnecting them. I guess >>>>>> it >>>>>> does have the advantage of not losing the customer though. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I had excellent luck in immediate shutdown until they got the >>>>>> copyright holder to give me an all clear. I don’t think I ever lost a >>>>>> customer. Some of them were down for a week or so at times. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Cassidy B. Larson <c...@infowest.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 02, 2016 1:49 PM >>>>>> >>>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com >>>>>> >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We send the notice and call them after to make sure they ack it. On >>>>>> the third strike, we suspend their service until they call in. Letting >>>>>> them >>>>>> know at that time if we receive future notices it’ll be a $100 >>>>>> administrative fee per notice we receive. They usually decide to go >>>>>> elsewhere at that point. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 1:45 PM, Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Usually we send a couple notices and never hear about it again. They >>>>>> usually quit the offending activity, or encrypt their traffic. When they >>>>>> just keep going and going we have to do something. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I will never forget the first time I shut somebody off for pirating a >>>>>> movie. Porn movie. Turns out to be the kid of a principal of a local >>>>>> school. Dad was pretty hot for being shut down until I explained the >>>>>> reason. I told him once he makes nice with the copyright holder we can >>>>>> turn him back on. I think he was worried it would leak into the press or >>>>>> the schoolboard would become aware. That never happened. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 02, 2016 1:41 PM >>>>>> >>>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com >>>>>> >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, we expect them to switch. We are uninstalling the equipment. >>>>>> I am just trying to figure out how long we should ban them for. I really >>>>>> don't care if they ever come back. Pirates are a hassle for me, and >>>>>> could >>>>>> potentially land any of us in front of a judge. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ray <ryan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Realistically if you shut me off I would switch to a new provider >>>>>> within a day. I don't know what kind of person would stick around on a >>>>>> ban >>>>>> no matter what the length of time is. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> For those of you who actually do some sort of enforcement, what >>>>>> amount of time do you ban them for? I figure even at 90 days they will >>>>>> get >>>>>> a new provider. So I was just going to go with one year. Is that >>>>>> excessive? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Justin Wilson <li...@mtin.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> You designate an “agent” within your company. I typical register the >>>>>> CEO, operations, or someone like that that as the agent. You would have >>>>>> no >>>>>> issue registering yourself as the agent. I would recommend you create a >>>>>> copyright@ e-mail address and use that as the designated e-mail >>>>>> contact. That way you know a request to copyright@ is most likely >>>>>> someone following protocol. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It’s like CALEA. Their just needs to be the proper person on file to >>>>>> contact, and server due process should it come to that. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Justin Wilson >>>>>> >>>>>> j...@mtin.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO >>>>>> >>>>>> xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I really have no idea about that. So I need to hire an agent, and >>>>>> then ignore all but the requests that come to me from that agent? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Justin Wilson <li...@mtin.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> The biggest thing I use in a determination is did they send it to the >>>>>> Registered Copyright Agent on file? You do have one correct? :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> http://copyright.gov/onlinesp/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have one, and it’s not sent to that agent, it’s not a real >>>>>> request IMHO. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Justin Wilson >>>>>> >>>>>> j...@mtin.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO >>>>>> >>>>>> xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 1:34 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It can't charge the copyright holder, but could it charge to company >>>>>> sending out the notices if they aren't the CRH? :) >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Keefe John <keefe...@ethoplex.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> This has been discussed before, the DMCA safe harbor doesn't allow the >>>>>> provider to charge the copyright holder for this. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2/2/2016 12:03 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> That's going to end up in a big mess of a lawsuit eventually. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Sterling Jacobson < >>>>>> sterl...@avative.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Haha! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If it’s against your AUP, make sure you have a clause in there that >>>>>> says >>>>>> you >>>>>> charge per incident. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Then go ahead and charge the customer. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sounds like if you are just going to kick them off eventually, might >>>>>> as >>>>>> well >>>>>> try to keep them, but make it costly. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If they don’t pay it, then they are off. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Nothing legally wrong with it if its in your policy I think. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <af-boun...@afmug.com>] On >>>>>> Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2016 10:57 AM >>>>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DMCA Time Management Fee >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Oh wow, youre seriously looking for a fight with customers >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you thing about charging a fee every time that a customer >>>>>> gets a >>>>>> DMCA takedown notice. These notices take time to track down and >>>>>> follow >>>>>> up >>>>>> on. If we charged $20 every time it would make it not really worth >>>>>> it to >>>>>> pirate that $10 movie. I would think that it should be legal, so >>>>>> long as >>>>>> we >>>>>> add it to our customer agreement. Anyone ever thought about this? >>>>>> Right >>>>>> now we pass on 5 of them and then make them find a new provider. It >>>>>> seems >>>>>> like they would be less likely to hit 5 if they had to pay $20 for >>>>>> each >>>>>> one. >>>>>> We really don't want these guys on our network anyway, so no sweat if >>>>>> they >>>>>> just cancel. Is anyone out there charging customers a fee for >>>>>> these? I >>>>>> know most of you just ignore them, but we like passing them on, as it >>>>>> lowers >>>>>> our overall usage. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your >>>>>> team >>>>>> as >>>>>> part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> >>>>>> This >>>>>> email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. >>>>>> www.avast.com >>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>> >> >> > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >
