Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 07:07:22PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 1.7K bytes in 36 lines about: : >a client. I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting : >to piss off my ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. A fine place to read more about the DMCA and your rights is http://www.chillingeffects.org/. -- Andrew
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 11:56:30PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi everyone, I run an exit node (nickname: swopusa), and now I'm >averaging 1 DMCA request per day for TV shows, movies and the like, >from paramount, NBC universal, etc. > > I do BW limiting @ 100k/sec -- 2GB/day. Otherwise it's the default >configuration. > > I'm really not all that smart about tor, I've never even used it as >a client. I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting >to piss off my ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. > > Any one have thoughts, besides NOT running an exit node? My first thought is to have a conversation with the linode person handling the takedowns, and encourage him/her to learn more about the legal requirements. As I understand from https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-dmca-response.html.en your ISP can discard all of the DMCA complaints directed toward your Tor relay -- they don't need to answer them. Whether they *want* to answer them, or hassle you, is another story, and practically speaking I agree it's a relevant one, but step one is distinguishing legal requirements from actions they are opting to take on their own. My second thought is that if you want to reduce the frequent of DMCA notices in particular, you might switch from the default exit policy, which permits most ports and denies a few, to an exit policy that permits a few popular ports and denies the rest. For example, a node that permits only *:80 and *:443 would still be useful for many Tor users, but might attract less file-sharing traffic. My third thought is to take a look through https://wiki.torproject.org/noreply/TheOnionRouter/TorGuideUniversities Hope that helps, --Roger
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) > The ISPs and hosting providers tend to have agreements with their > network providers that stipulate that the customer ISP take action to > avoid stuff the provider doesn't like. Such as phishing and break-in > attempts, which are bad. But also things like IRC usage (yes, even IRC > clients). (snip) IRC usage and clients are bad? I won't even say what that makes me think of the provider - I'm sure you folks can guess. - -- F. Fox AAS, CompTIA A+/Network+/Security+ Owner of Tor node "kitsune" http://fenrisfox.livejournal.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQIVAwUBSDRxa+j8TXmm2ggwAQg1bQ/8CIysM4Z0nw/NNllFGjPS6rAWOYO6UCbo n+TRNrrXFL7Uw6/dtcUPCCIdpvjaqxwWxXLziflvBLWYB5+orWO9bH6EyJAJA/Zy ezXwaSsfDAJREyxoFt1gLmicv2G9sq9hOask+sWU9dFq8z2Exvvd4OoLxlaJA2ay 5T41EJ9WqjI0/tFuy4Sob4PoGJW6Ch2t7R343DVZfjKdzO7yHBZgW9W2dswIPA+k rJrhJpOeP/N30Opku5XBdJyL42wnQpqLWzH05x6IIpmuhfxt55+X5oewve2OMQ0p rtABu8ySxv4WBgg1hlB3tmFdt7CrYSN+HSG8ZSSevpnh4GToxrPjyVyPL0deXXEq Ld96KiuDi7DJt+32TKbbl9sYVmTiI0mUJqURzYHnRs3I7HTXpP/xFi0WwV/fmDSc tFD8WF6TyG264JvoK2TGzPrsp9hzExMOv78zj4+yt+Xth+PG7zjJ6xO+ICjbbPZA uK2kpTUzeH+W/RSc6jD4ldsgUeAGfR8/SWeqd4hHOY7dU1M9kuChcYnMyPSmQ6er uJp/EHpC565HNafDukYBtt9PPZRR+cqW+s0tdAvRvygxVLNvm2TDIdWOPDRU/FA4 mHWGSravX2xJQai3RDzW8xN2FzE92/oQVVnkR0fqPjI7/TfYE6WQ4IP2QT+OEE0F hbM/+ibyir0= =6OOC -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
Geoffrey Goodell wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 06:34:41PM -0400, Brian Puccio wrote: [many interesting points cut] I think that we need to take a step back and understand more about the complaints being served to ISPs. 1. Some are clearly DMCA takedown notices. Are these the vast majority? What other kinds of abuse notices are served to Tor exit node operators, with what frequency and in what proportions? The ISPs and hosting providers tend to have agreements with their network providers that stipulate that the customer ISP take action to avoid stuff the provider doesn't like. Such as phishing and break-in attempts, which are bad. But also things like IRC usage (yes, even IRC clients). 2. To what extent are ISPs legally bound to respond to the various different kinds of notices? For each of the various kinds of abuse complaints, surely some ISPs will say "this is an anonymizing relay, go away", while others will engage in an expensive investigation process, and still others will just shut down their customers without further questions. ISP staffers and counsel might not like the idea of being served legal requests, but it is critical that we understand the extent to which they are legally bound to respond, and the space of potential responses. If the points in this document [1] do not provide a simple, consistent, effective way for ISPs to respond without significant thought, then the document should be amended -- but it is not clear to me that ISPs are significantly burdened by abuse complaints in the general case. I would like to see evidence to the contrary. Some hosting providers (not just ISPs) receive 100s of abuse complaints for various kind of stuff in a month. Some of them may show up from process servers.
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 06:34:41PM -0400, Brian Puccio wrote: [many interesting points cut] > What if my hosting business were to expand? What if my 500 became 5? > I'd have 500 people running exit nodes (the same 1%) and I'd need to > spend hours every day keeping up with takedowns. In fact, I'd need to > hire some extra help to respond to all of them, I'd need my own legal > department. How would I pay for this? Not by increasing my rates, no, > that's unfair to the 99% that don't make me deal with all these > takedowns. No, I'd charge the 1% a legal recovery fee. They would pay the > attorneys and secretaries who respond to each takedown. I think that we need to take a step back and understand more about the complaints being served to ISPs. 1. Some are clearly DMCA takedown notices. Are these the vast majority? What other kinds of abuse notices are served to Tor exit node operators, with what frequency and in what proportions? 2. To what extent are ISPs legally bound to respond to the various different kinds of notices? For each of the various kinds of abuse complaints, surely some ISPs will say "this is an anonymizing relay, go away", while others will engage in an expensive investigation process, and still others will just shut down their customers without further questions. ISP staffers and counsel might not like the idea of being served legal requests, but it is critical that we understand the extent to which they are legally bound to respond, and the space of potential responses. If the points in this document [1] do not provide a simple, consistent, effective way for ISPs to respond without significant thought, then the document should be amended -- but it is not clear to me that ISPs are significantly burdened by abuse complaints in the general case. I would like to see evidence to the contrary. [1] http://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq.html.en
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On May 18, 2008, at 6:46 PM, Geoffrey Goodell wrote: On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 04:58:08PM -0400, Brian Puccio wrote: For what it is worth, here is Linode's position on running an exit node: http://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3082 The comment from caker is important: http://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=14063&sid=d0c8a8f83495edf787592499f4fdb5f5#14063 "Eventually, we'd run tired of handling these and ask you to knock it off." Linode staff are exercising discretion in determining which circumstances warrant threatening their customers with disconnection. There is no refinable, repeatable way for a customer to know whether her deployment of a Tor exit node is acceptable to Linode or not -- that decision rests squarely with Linode on a case-by-case basis. Unchecked discretion offers an opportunity for discrimination. Who is to say that some customers running Tor nodes will not cause Linode admins to "run tired" sooner than others for reasons entirely unrelated to the activity of their exit nodes? If responding to your DMCA takedown notice is more tiresome than responding to someone else's, I'd probably cancel you first. After all, you're the one who is causing me more grief. What is not clear is why Linode staffers want to take on such responsibility -- do they really want to be in a position of judging what constitutes acceptable behavior and what does not, any more than is necessary to satisfy legal requirements and fairness issues with respect to network performance? Personally, if I were a hosting provider (and I guess you better be thankful that I'm not) and I got one DMCA takedown notice because of you, I'd bill you for whatever administrative overhead you caused me, whatever I had to pay my attorney if I had to consult him and tell you that the next one means your account is cancelled. I'm operating my business to make money. You taking up my time and costing me money is counterproductive to that and I'd do better off not to have customers like you. The short story is, Linode doesn't judge what is acceptable and what isn't beyond the fact that they're only willing to deal with a certain number of DMCA takedowns before they get tired of playing the game. You seem to be upset that they haven't ennumerated their limit, but I have a feeling if you push them for one, they'll come up with the safest number they can think of: zero. I'd rather have there be a bit of a gray area that I know I can fall into rather than being outright told "sorry, once we get a takedown notice, you're cut off." There's probably a thousand different variables including how long you have been a customer, how frequent the notices come in, what size account you have, if your monthly payment is constantly bounced, what I had for dinner last night, how much your account stresses the server and tons of other things. If you don't like that policy, get your bandwidth from some place else. It is their company it is their policy and you either need to agree to it or host elsewhere. I *like* the gray area. And until you show me some ISP that will give it to me in writing that I can operate a Tor exit node regardless of how many takedowns I get, it seems to me that a gray area is the best thing either one of us is likely to find. If I were running a business and I had 500 customers (I'm not huge, but I'm not tiny, either) and 1% of them ran exit nodes and received one takedown per day each, I'd be spending 30 minutes every day for the rest of my life dealing with them. And I may be willing to give up half an hour a day until I retire so you can run your exit nodes. But I might not. And one day I might say "hey, you can continue to run a Tor node, but not an exit node, it's either that or you need to find another host." What if my hosting business were to expand? What if my 500 became 5? I'd have 500 people running exit nodes (the same 1%) and I'd need to spend hours every day keeping up with takedowns. In fact, I'd need to hire some extra help to respond to all of them, I'd need my own legal department. How would I pay for this? Not by increasing my rates, no, that's unfair to the 99% that don't make me deal with all these takedowns. No, I'd charge the 1% a legal recovery fee. They would pay the attorneys and secretaries who respond to each takedown.
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 04:58:08PM -0400, Brian Puccio wrote: > On May 15, 2008, at 6:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Hi everyone, I run an exit node (nickname: swopusa), and now I'm >> averaging 1 DMCA request per day for TV shows, movies and the like, >> from paramount, NBC universal, etc. >> >> I do BW limiting @ 100k/sec -- 2GB/day. Otherwise it's the default >> configuration. >> >> I'm really not all that smart about tor, I've never even used it as a >> client. I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting >> to piss off my ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. > > For what it is worth, here is Linode's position on running an exit node: > > http://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3082 The comment from caker is important: http://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=14063&sid=d0c8a8f83495edf787592499f4fdb5f5#14063 "Eventually, we'd run tired of handling these and ask you to knock it off." Linode staff are exercising discretion in determining which circumstances warrant threatening their customers with disconnection. There is no refinable, repeatable way for a customer to know whether her deployment of a Tor exit node is acceptable to Linode or not -- that decision rests squarely with Linode on a case-by-case basis. Unchecked discretion offers an opportunity for discrimination. Who is to say that some customers running Tor nodes will not cause Linode admins to "run tired" sooner than others for reasons entirely unrelated to the activity of their exit nodes? What is not clear is why Linode staffers want to take on such responsibility -- do they really want to be in a position of judging what constitutes acceptable behavior and what does not, any more than is necessary to satisfy legal requirements and fairness issues with respect to network performance?
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On May 15, 2008, at 6:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone, I run an exit node (nickname: swopusa), and now I'm averaging 1 DMCA request per day for TV shows, movies and the like, from paramount, NBC universal, etc. I do BW limiting @ 100k/sec -- 2GB/day. Otherwise it's the default configuration. I'm really not all that smart about tor, I've never even used it as a client. I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting to piss off my ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. For what it is worth, here is Linode's position on running an exit node: http://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3082
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm really not all that smart about tor, I've never even used it as a > client. I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting to > piss off my ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. > > Any one have thoughts, besides NOT running an exit node? Don't know about the DMCA bots, but some people don't try to shoot the messenger. It probably won't solve your problem, but you could try to make it more obvious that you are running Tor, like some of the other exit nodes do. You could change the hostname that will show up in server logs from plm.swopusa.org to the more descriptive tor-anon-proxy.swopusa.org. The website at plm.swopusa.org only says "It works!" You could change this to the don't blame me template. https://tor-svn.freehaven.net/svn/tor/trunk/contrib/tor-exit-notice.html This is what it says to DMCA complainers: "If you are a representative of a company who feels that this router is being used to violate the DMCA, please be aware that this machine does not host or contain any illegal content. Also be aware that network infrastructure maintainers are not liable for the type of content that passes over their equipment, in accordance with DMCA "safe harbor" provisions. In other words, you will have just as much luck sending a takedown notice to the Internet backbone providers. Please consult EFF's prepared response for more information on this matter."
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On Thu, 15 May 2008 23:56:30 +0100 (BST) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hi everyone, I run an exit node (nickname: swopusa), and now I'm averaging 1 >DMCA request per day for TV shows, movies and the like, from paramount, NBC >universal, etc. > >I do BW limiting @ 100k/sec -- 2GB/day. Otherwise it's the default >configuration. > >I'm really not all that smart about tor, I've never even used it as a client. >I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting to piss off my >ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. > >Any one have thoughts, besides NOT running an exit node? > You could use ExitPolicy lines in torrc either to a) prevent exits to the port(s) in question or b) prevent exits to those particular IP addresses or, more specifically, to those IP address and port combinations. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **
Re: lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 6:56 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi everyone, I run an exit node (nickname: swopusa), and now I'm averaging 1 > DMCA request per day for TV shows, movies and the like, from paramount, NBC > universal, etc. > > I do BW limiting @ 100k/sec -- 2GB/day. Otherwise it's the default > configuration. > > I'm really not all that smart about tor, I've never even used it as a client. > I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting to piss off my > ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. > > Any one have thoughts, besides NOT running an exit node? Okay, what I've seen lately is that people are connecting to Bittorrent trackers via TOR. This causes the tracker to see the TOR exit as the client IP, but the actual data is exchanged directly between the peers without TOR's involvement.As such *no copyrighted data crossed the tor node*. This makes a lot of sense for the user since it hides their IP from people trying to enforce copyright, but doesn't really slow down their transfers. With this in mind, Are the DMCA notices coming from the same few parties? If so, the following tactic might be helpful: A valid DMCA complaint includes a sworn statement that the issuing party, to the best of their knowledge, believes the claim of infringement to be accurate. The copyright complaint is not accurate in these cases, but that may not be clear to these DMCA-bots. (They shouldn't be making claims based on tracker reports ... since tracker use != copyright infringement, but no court has yet slapped their wrists for it...) If you make sure that the appropriate party at each company has actual knowledge of the nature of your IP as a anonymizing proxy that hosts or transmits no copyrighted materials belonging to them and that complaints of this type are going to be invalid and they continued to send claims that you are distributing their works then they are at risk of being found guilty of perjury. Of course, there is no precedent for this kind of fight yet., but it might be effective to make that argument in a certified letter to their legal offices. At the least it should cause them to figure that you are more trouble than it's worth. Obviously, it would be most wise to consult an attorney. I am not an attorney. Socially, I don't see any problem with defending the use of TOR to connect to trackers anonymously. Connecting to a tracker and exchanging data is not a crime, it's not copyright infringement. You're not disturbing the rule of law by anonymizing an actual crime. The DMCA-bots should limit their complaints to cases where there is more direct evidence of a crime available. although the risk of this line of thinking is that requesting the copyrighted data could be argued to be inducement (or not a violation since it was sending the data to the owners agent), so it may form an argument increased surveillances powers by copyright holders. :(But I guess copy[rf]ight philosophy is going pretty off-topic for this list.
lots of DMCA request's... (1/day)
Hi everyone, I run an exit node (nickname: swopusa), and now I'm averaging 1 DMCA request per day for TV shows, movies and the like, from paramount, NBC universal, etc. I do BW limiting @ 100k/sec -- 2GB/day. Otherwise it's the default configuration. I'm really not all that smart about tor, I've never even used it as a client. I don't mind occasional DMCA requests but 1 a day is starting to piss off my ISP (linode.com) and frustrate me. Any one have thoughts, besides NOT running an exit node? With Love, Tara
