John Levine:
> In article you write:
>> The main issue with the notion of keeping abuse@ separate from a
>> dedicated DMCA takedown mailbox is companies like IP Echelon will just
>> blindly E-mail whatever abuse POC is associated with either the AS
>> record or whichever POCs are specifically
In article <627928051.4141.1533644391202.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck> you
write:
>Unless the e-mail is to the contact on file with the FCC, it isn't an official
>DMCA take down request, so the request is garbage.
It's not the FCC, it's the copyright office.
The law also says that the
Corbe"
To: "Eric Kuhnke" , "nanog@nanog.org list"
Sent: Sunday, August 5, 2018 2:43:36 PM
Subject: Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role
inboxes
On 8/4/2018 01:04:17, "Eric Kuhnke" wrote:
>If you were setting up something new from
at 8:56 PM, John Levine wrote:
In article you write:
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.
Dealing with DMCA notices is a matter of statute law in the US, and it
is a really, really bad idea to ignore
In article you write:
>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.
Dealing with DMCA notices is a matter of statute law in the US, and it
is a really, really bad idea to ignore them unread. It doesn't matter
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
Le 2018-08-06 16:03, Jérôme Nicolle a écrit :
Hi Jack,
Le 05/08/2018 à 21:51, na...@jack.fr.eu.org a écrit :
By "appropriate place", you mean "the trash bin" ?
Nope, that would eat-up storage and IOs. The proper destination is
/dev/null, unless they provide you with the required informations
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 10:09 AM, wrote:
>
> Asked and answered already.
>
> On 8/5/2018 16:53:35, "John Levine" wrote:
> >See https://www.copyright.gov/dmca-directory/
>
> If you are in fact registered there, it becomes *their* problem to send
> their reports to the address you registered.
>
>
On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 09:51:17 -0500, Matt Harris said:
> But then the question becomes "how are they supposed to find the 'proper
> address' for their reports?"
Asked and answered already.
On 8/5/2018 16:53:35, "John Levine" wrote:
>See https://www.copyright.gov/dmca-directory/
If you are in
On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:46 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> This is a solvable problem. If they're sending unsolicited bulk email
> (aka "spam"), then they are, by definition, spammers. Block them and
> move on. If/when they decide to send proper DMCA notices and send them
> to the proper address,
On 8/5/2018 18:46:36, "Rich Kulawiec" wrote:
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 07:43:36PM +, Daniel Corbe wrote:
This is a solvable problem. If they're sending unsolicited bulk email
(aka "spam"), then they are, by definition, spammers. Block them and
move on. If/when they decide to send
Hi Jack,
Le 05/08/2018 à 21:51, na...@jack.fr.eu.org a écrit :
> By "appropriate place", you mean "the trash bin" ?
Nope, that would eat-up storage and IOs. The proper destination is
/dev/null, unless they provide you with the required informations to
send a bill.
Best regards,
--
Jérôme
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 07:43:36PM +, Daniel Corbe wrote:
> The main issue with the notion of keeping abuse@ separate from a dedicated
> DMCA takedown mailbox is companies like IP Echelon will just blindly E-mail
> whatever abuse POC is associated with either the AS record or whichever POCs
>
On 8/4/2018 01:04:17, "Eric Kuhnke" wrote:
> Automated sorting tools *can* pull things which match regexes for
> automatically-generated DMCA notifications out of an inbox and route them
> to the appropriate place.
By "appropriate place", you mean "the trash bin" ?
Sieve filters are enough for
On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 10:04:17PM -0700, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> If you were setting up something new from a clean sheet of paper design -
> do you consider it appropriate to have an abuse role inbox that's dedicated
> to actual network abuse issues (security problems, DDoS, IP hijacks,
>
I'd keep them separate since it's a different set of people that needs to
handle dmca vs actual abuse.
On Sat, Aug 4, 2018, 1:07 AM Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> If you were setting up something new from a clean sheet of paper design -
> do you consider it appropriate to have an abuse role inbox that's
If you were setting up something new from a clean sheet of paper design -
do you consider it appropriate to have an abuse role inbox that's dedicated
to actual network abuse issues (security problems, DDoS, IP hijacks,
misbehavior of downstream customers, etc), and keep that separate from DMCA
17 matches
Mail list logo
