from Jim Fleming.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/internet-now-officially-too-big-ip-addresses-run-out-n386081
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
// jamie rishaw //
Chess is just a game, and real people aren't pieces. You can't assign
more value
-officially-too-big-ip-addresses-run-out-n386081
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
John Curran gets a quote; NBC gets the etymology of IPv4 wrong.
Just keep them away from Jim Fleming.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/internet-now-officially-too-big-ip-addresses-run-out-n386081
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
The British have been using the correct six character word length for humour ad
memoriam.
Christian de Larrinaga
On 4 Dec 2011, at 15:15, Gary Buhrmaster gary.buhrmas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 18:18, David Barak thegame...@yahoo.com wrote:
Should the HAC be expected to
- Original Message -
From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
On Dec 5, 2011, at 12:27 AM, cdel.firsthand.net wrote:
The British have been using the correct six character word length
for humour ad memoriam.
Extra and unnecessary characters do not a correct word make.
The u is silent.
On Dec 2, 2011, at 1:55 AM, Paul Graydon wrote:
On 12/1/2011 7:20 PM, John Curran wrote:
Wayne -
Your subject line (IP addresses are now assets) could mislead folks,
so I'd advise waiting to review the actual sale order once approved by
the court before making summary conclusions.
ARIN
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 18:18, David Barak thegame...@yahoo.com wrote:
Should the HAC be expected to manage the transition to HumorV6?
I am not that familiar with Humorv6. Has Hv6 had sufficient
operational input, or is it based on a philosophically pure
redesign of humor making it
- Original Message -
From: Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
if you're going to do a thing, do it RIGHT!!
Anything worth doing, is worth over-doing.
I love a good self-referential posting; don't you?
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 20:01, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
.
Suggestion received and needing confirmation:
That ARIN or a party it designates assign one or more sense(s) of humour to
the CEO.
I
It's hard to sustain that kind of commitment... so we need to form a Humor
Advisory Committee. Their job would be to determine which behaviors the
community finds most humorous. When the community doesn't produce enough
material, the comedy HAC would write jokes on our behalf (for adoption by
Should the HAC be expected to manage the transition to HumorV6?
David
From: David Barak thegame...@yahoo.com
Should the HAC be expected to manage the transition to HumorV6?
BEFORE that is introduced, one needs a mailing-list designated for discussion
of the potential problems an dangers associated therewith, similar to the
ACM's discussion list on computer
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu writes:
Would it be correct to summarize the ARIN position as It's murkier than
Cerner
makes it out to be, and some lawyers are gonna get stinking filthy rich
litigating this one?
:)
In any litigation, Counsel always wins. I often remind myself that
there's still
On Dec 2, 2011, at 2:48 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
Would it be correct to summarize the ARIN position as It's murkier than
Cerner
makes it out to be, and some lawyers are gonna get stinking filthy rich
litigating this one?
It's pretty simple: you can write a contract to transfer IP
, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
Would it be correct to summarize the ARIN position as It's murkier than
Cerner
makes it out to be, and some lawyers are gonna get stinking filthy rich
litigating this one?
It's pretty simple: you can write a contract to transfer IP
addresses in accordance with policy
On Dec 2, 2011, at 7:57 AM, Joly MacFie wrote:
Hi John,
I'm sorry to be thick, but can you explain right of visibility to the
public portion of registrations a little further?.
Under what circumstances might ARIN deny approval?
Joly -
Requests are processed according the transfer
-Original Message-
From: John Curran [mailto:jcur...@arin.net]
Joly -
Requests are processed according the transfer policies
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#eight. If a
request doesn't meet the transfer policy (e.g. the sale
is not to an actual entity that has an
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 03:52, Robert E. Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote:
In any litigation, Counsel always wins. I often remind myself that
there's still time to go to law school. :-)
It may be too late. The glory days of getting a JD
and then racking in the money are apparently over.
In a message written on Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 11:04:23PM -0500, Michael R. Wayne
wrote:
After negotiating with multiple prospective buyers, Cerner Corp.
agreed to buy the Internet addresses for $12 each. Other bids were
as low as $1.50 each, according to a bankruptcy court filing.
. There have been
others prior to Nortel. There will be more after Borders.
Circuit City:
http://www.slideshare.net/Streambank/offering-memo-ip-addresses-92111final
Best.
-M
On Dec 2, 2011, at 8:23 AM, Leigh Porter wrote:
So I do wonder, how is this policy is being enforced and will ARIN be
investigating this current news item?
Leigh -
No investigation is needed, as I already noted the parties
have sought out ARIN in advance. Note that original sales
On Dec 1, 2011, at 23:04, Michael R. Wayne wa...@staff.msen.com wrote:
After negotiating with multiple prospective buyers, Cerner Corp.
agreed to buy the Internet addresses for $12 each. Other bids were
as low as $1.50 each, according to a bankruptcy court filing.
Clearly the addresses
I have acres on the moon that are up for sale.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Christopher J. Pilkington c...@0x1.net wrote:
On Dec 1, 2011, at 23:04, Michael R. Wayne wa...@staff.msen.com wrote:
After negotiating with multiple prospective buyers, Cerner Corp.
agreed to buy the Internet
On Dec 2, 2011, at 10:16 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
ARIN, on many occasions, has stated that they have no authority over
legacy address space. They made this declaration in the Kamens/sex.com
case. I haven't heard that anything has changed since then.
Martin -
ARIN will maintain the
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 11:04:23PM -0500, Michael R. Wayne
wrote:
After negotiating with multiple prospective buyers, Cerner Corp.
agreed to buy the Internet addresses for $12 each. Other bids were
as low as $1.50 each,
-Original Message-
From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org]
Sent: 02 December 2011 19:26
To: Leo Bicknell
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: IP addresses are now assets
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 11:04:23PM -0500
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:20 PM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:[cut]
Your subject line (IP addresses are now assets) could mislead folks,
[cut]
ianal, but the treatment of ip addresses by the bankruptcy court would
tend to agree with the definition of an asset from webster's new world
law
--- jsah...@gmail.com wrote:
the speculative market exists and is growing, why do certain factions
of the community keep trying to pretend that it doesn't?
---
Because they're busy getting ipv6 up and that will make these things less
important? ;-)
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:37:29 -0500, joshua sahala jsah...@gmail.com
wrote:
Any property or right that is owned by a person or entity and has
monetary value. See also liability.
If it was a RIR assignment, it's not owned. It's more akin to a
lease. That said, there are documented
I have a boatload of IPv6 addresses I'm willing to sell at the low, low price
of $.01 each.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher J. Pilkington [mailto:c...@0x1.net]
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 12:18 PM
To: Michael R. Wayne
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: IP addresses are now assets
On Dec 1
From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi@nanog.org Fri Dec 2 13:29:31
2011
From: Leigh Porter leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com
To: Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org,
Leo Bicknell
bickn...@ufp.org
Subject: RE: IP addresses are now assets
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 19:29:43
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:37:29PM -0700, joshua sahala wrote:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:20 PM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:[cut]
Your subject line (IP addresses are now assets) could mislead folks,
[cut]
ianal, but the treatment of ip addresses by the bankruptcy court would
tend
John Lightfoot jlightf...@gmail.com wrote;
I have a boatload of IPv6 addresses I'm willing to sell at the low, low price
of $.01 each.
Good for you. _I_ have somewhat over 17.8 million IPv4 addresses, in 3 large
blocks, for which I will sell my 'right to use', at half your offering price.
On 2 December 2011 20:01, Henry Yen he...@aegisinfosys.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:37:29PM -0700, joshua sahala wrote:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:20 PM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:[cut]
Your subject line (IP addresses are now assets) could mislead folks,
[cut]
ianal
Mike Jones m...@mikejones.in wrote on 12/02/2011 03:14:58 PM:
What about land? it's a public resource that you've paid money to
someone in exchange for transferring their rights over that public
resource to you.
Land is private property.
Joe
In a message written on Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 03:28:22PM -0500, Joe Loiacono
wrote:
Mike Jones m...@mikejones.in wrote on 12/02/2011 03:14:58 PM:
What about land? it's a public resource that you've paid money to
someone in exchange for transferring their rights over that public
resource to
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:37:29PM -0700, joshua sahala wrote:
Any property or right that is owned by a person or entity and has
monetary value. See also liability.
All of the property of a person or entity or its total value;
entries on a balance sheet listing such property.
to addresses (in the registration database) are being
transferred for money. Those rights may indeed be assets
(although that's likely a question better suited for lawyers)
Perhaps Rights to IP addresses can be sold! would be a better
title, but it's not exactly newsworthy since we've all
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 12:37:29 MST, joshua sahala said:
the speculative market exists and is growing, why do certain factions
of the community keep trying to pretend that it doesn't?
I'm sure at least some of those factions pretend it doesn't because admitting
it does would be a game changer.
On Dec 2, 2011, at 2:56 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 12:37:29 MST, joshua sahala said:
the speculative market exists and is growing, why do certain factions
of the community keep trying to pretend that it doesn't?
I'm sure at least some of those factions pretend
registries, and the community, to provide unique usage of IP addresses.
The existence of unique IP addresses exist only because of the
community and the address
registries' efforts; the community owns the uniqueness of IP
addresses, which is a kind
of intangible property, because they built
this one?
It's pretty simple: you can write a contract to transfer IP
addresses in accordance with policy, and we are now seeing
most parties come to us in advance either to prequalify or
make the sale conditional on approval.
No, Valdis, the ARIN position is if we wanted Curran to have
On Dec 2, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
No, Valdis, the ARIN position is if we wanted Curran to have a sense of
humor,
we'd have issued him one.
Changes in this area may be proposed via the ARIN Consultation and
Suggestion Process -
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 03:33:55AM +, John Curran wrote:
On Dec 2, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
No, Valdis, the ARIN position is if we wanted Curran to have a sense of
humor,
we'd have issued him one.
Changes in this area may be proposed via the ARIN Consultation and
Ah... *this* is the Whacky Weekend thread.
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 03:33:55AM +, John Curran wrote:
On Dec 2, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
No, Valdis, the ARIN position
From
http://www.detnews.com/article/20111201/BIZ/112010483/1361/Borders-selling-Internet-addresses-for-$786-000
Borders selling Internet addresses for $786,000
Bill Rochelle/ Bloomberg News
Borders Group Inc., the liquidated Ann Arbor-based bookseller, will
generate $786,000 by
Wayne -
Your subject line (IP addresses are now assets) could mislead folks,
so I'd advise waiting to review the actual sale order once approved by
the court before making summary conclusions.
ARIN holds that IP address space is not property but is managed as a
public resource. Address
On 12/1/2011 7:20 PM, John Curran wrote:
Wayne -
Your subject line (IP addresses are now assets) could mislead folks,
so I'd advise waiting to review the actual sale order once approved by
the court before making summary conclusions.
ARIN holds that IP address space is not property
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 05:20:39 GMT, John Curran said:
ARIN holds that IP address space is not property but is managed as a
public resource. Address holders may have certain rights (such as the
right to be the registrant of the address block, the right to transfer the
registration, etc.) but
From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi@nanog.org Thu May 12 11:04:15
2011
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 19:33:21 -0500
Subject: Re: 23,000 IP addresses
From: Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com
To: Michael Holstein michael.holst...@csuohio.edu
Cc: NANOG list nanog@nanog.org
On Wed, May 11, 2011
On May 12, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
I wonder does IANA frequently receive legal papers demanding the
name and street address of the customer at 127.0.0.1 ? :)
I know people, well at least one, that have sent spam complaints to IANA
claiming junk mail originated from
Luis Marta wrote on 2011-05-10:
In the EU you have Directive 2006/24/EC: http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:105:0054:0063:EN:PDF
Article 6 - Periods of retention
Member States shall ensure that the categories of data specified in Article
5 are retained for
In article 5f713bd4b694ac42a8bb61aa6001a...@mail.dessus.com, Keith
Medcalf kmedc...@dessus.com writes
Article 5 - Categories of data to be retained
1. Member States shall ensure that the following categories of data are
retained under this Directive:
(a) data necessary to trace and identify the
I wonder how things go if you challenge them in court. This is surely a
topic for another list, but it seems to me it'd be fairly difficult to
prove unless they downloaded part of the movie from your IP and verified
that what they got really was a part of the movie.
I have the netflow
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 09:56:56AM +0800, Ong Beng Hui said:
while, I am not a lawyer, so what after they know who is using that
broadband connection for that IP. So, they have identified the 80yr old,
what next ? and what if i have a free-for-all wireless router in my
house which
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Michael Holstein
michael.holst...@csuohio.edu wrote:
I wonder how things go if you challenge them in court. This is surely a
topic for another list, but it seems to me it'd be fairly difficult to
prove unless they downloaded part of the movie from your IP and
(it's one in a billion to crack it! beyond a
reasonable doubt! we dont have anyone anywhere in our IT who could possibly
crack it!)
A billion iterations takes what fraction of a second using a high-end
multi-card gamer rig and CUDA? (or for the cheap/lazy, a S3/Tesla instance).
Even for
On May 10, 2011, at 8:30 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Mark Radabaugh m...@amplex.net wrote:
On 5/10/11 9:07 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A good reason why every ISP should have a published civil subpoena
compliance fee.
23,000 * $150 each should only cost them
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:16 AM, William Allen Simpson
william.allen.simp...@gmail.com wrote:
Courts like precedent. I choose Facebook's precedent. Seems reasonable to
me.
That's also roughly in line with Nextel and others for CALEA.
Hrm, I had thought that CALEA specifically removed the
On 5/11/11 11:19 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On May 10, 2011, at 8:30 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Mark Radabaughm...@amplex.net wrote:
On 5/10/11 9:07 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A good reason why every ISP should have a published civil subpoena
compliance fee.
On 5/11/11 8:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:16 AM, William Allen Simpson
william.allen.simp...@gmail.com wrote:
Courts like precedent. I choose Facebook's precedent. Seems reasonable to
me.
That's also roughly in line with Nextel and others for CALEA.
Hrm, I
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
On 5/11/11 8:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:16 AM, William Allen Simpson
william.allen.simp...@gmail.com wrote:
Courts like precedent. I choose Facebook's precedent. Seems reasonable to
me.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Michael Holstein
michael.holst...@csuohio.edu wrote:
I have the netflow records to prove this is NOT the case. All
MediaSentry (et.al.) do is scrape the tracker. We have also received a
number of takedown notices that have numbers transposed, involve parts
://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
If you have IP addresses on this list, expect to receive papers shortly.
Here is more of the backstory :
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/biggest-bittorrent-case/
This is turning into quite a legal racket (get order
alleged downloads of some
Sylvester Stallone movie I have never heard of; subpoenas are expected to go
out this week.
I thought that there might be some interest in the list of these addresses :
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
If you have IP
On Tue, 10 May 2011, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A Federal Judge has decided to let the U.S. Copyright Group subpoena ISPs
over 23,000 alleged downloads of some
Sylvester Stallone movie I have never heard of; subpoenas are expected to go
out this week.
I thought that there might be some interest
seen Iron Man 2.
subpoenas are
expected to go out this week.
I thought that there might be some interest in the list of these
addresses :
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
Mine is not. These are only US ISPs ?
If you have IP addresses
A Federal Judge has decided to let the U.S. Copyright Group subpoena
ISPs over 23,000 alleged downloads of some Sylvester Stallone movie I have
never heard of [. . .]
I thought that there might be some interest in the list of these addresses :
in the list of these addresses :
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
If you have IP addresses on this list, expect to receive papers shortly.
Here is more of the backstory :
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/biggest-bittorrent-case
...@amtrak.com
-Original Message-
From: Jon Lewis [mailto:jle...@lewis.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 9:38 AM
To: Marshall Eubanks
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: 23,000 IP addresses
On Tue, 10 May 2011, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A Federal Judge has decided to let the U.S. Copyright Group subpoena ISPs
So are they basing this on you downloading it or on making it available for
others?
Apologies for the top post...
--
Leigh Porter
On 10 May 2011, at 14:40, Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org wrote:
On Tue, 10 May 2011, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A Federal Judge has decided to let the U.S.
/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
If you have IP addresses on this list, expect to receive papers shortly.
Here is more of the backstory :
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/biggest-bittorrent-case/
This is turning into quite a legal racket (get order $ 3000 for sending
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 09:42, Leigh Porter
leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com wrote:
So are they basing this on you downloading it or on making it available for
others?
Without knowing the details, I wouldn't assume any such level of
competence or integrity. It could just be a broad witch hunt.
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 09:42, Leigh Porter
leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com wrote:
So are they basing this on you downloading it or on making it available for
others?
Without knowing the details, I wouldn't assume any
On Tue, 10 May 2011 10:22:03 -0400
Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 09:42, Leigh Porter
leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com wrote:
So are they basing this on you downloading it or on
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
The dates in the timestamps are back in February. We deleted those logs
..in the regular course of business..
a LONG TIME AGO.
If you didn't do that, you really ought to ask yourself why.
Regards,
Michael
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:37 AM, William Pitcock
neno...@systeminplace.net wrote:
On Tue, 10 May 2011 10:22:03 -0400
Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
At least baytsp got theirs? (money I mean)
Do you have any links to evidence of this? I would love to just be
able to
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Michael Holstein
michael.holst...@csuohio.edu wrote:
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
The dates in the timestamps are back in February. We deleted those logs
..in the regular course of business..
a LONG
/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
If you have IP addresses on this list, expect to receive papers shortly.
Here is more of the backstory :
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/biggest-bittorrent-case/
This is turning into quite a legal racket (get order $ 3000
In article fotexpppbuynf...@perry.co.uk, Roland Perry lists@internetp
olicyagency.com writes
Attempts a bit like this have come unstuck in the UK. Search for
Davenport Lyons and ACS Law
And this ruling (and fine) have appeared from the UK's privacy regulator
today (note especially that the fine
A Federal Judge has decided to let the U.S. Copyright Group subpoena
ISPs over 23,000 alleged downloads of some
Sylvester Stallone movie I have never heard of; subpoenas are expected
to go out this week.
I thought that there might be some interest in the list of these
addresses :
be some interest in the list of these addresses :
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/expendibleipaddresses.pdf
If you have IP addresses on this list, expect to receive papers shortly.
Has anyone converted that file to some useful format like ASCII? You know
-- something
On May 10, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
On May 10, 2011, at 9:07 11AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Has anyone converted that file to some useful format like ASCII? You know
-- something greppable?
I've converted it to ascii, but I don't have a place to host it.
I can send
On May 10, 2011, at 2:10 10PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
On May 10, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
On May 10, 2011, at 9:07 11AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Has anyone converted that file to some useful format like ASCII? You know
-- something greppable?
I've converted it to
In the EU you have Directive 2006/24/EC:
But I'm not, and neither are most of the ISPs in the linked document.
Regards,
Michael Holstein
Information Security Administrator
Cleveland State University
On May 10, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Michael Holstein wrote:
In the EU you have Directive 2006/24/EC:
But I'm not, and neither are most of the ISPs in the linked document.
Regards,
Michael Holstein
Information Security Administrator
Cleveland State University
In the US, I believe that
On May 10, 2011, at 3:02 33PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On May 10, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Michael Holstein wrote:
In the EU you have Directive 2006/24/EC:
But I'm not, and neither are most of the ISPs in the linked document.
Regards,
Michael Holstein
Information Security Administrator
From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:02:33 -0700
On May 10, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Michael Holstein wrote:
In the EU you have Directive 2006/24/EC:
But I'm not, and neither are most of the ISPs in the linked document.
Regards,
Michael Holstein
On Tue, 10 May 2011, Owen DeLong wrote:
In the US, I believe that CALEA requires you to have those records for
7 years.
Some universities have taken the position that they do not meet the
criteria for being communications service providers under CALEA, and
therefore not subject to the
In the US, I believe that CALEA requires you to have those records for 7
years.
No, it doesn't (records *of the requests* are required, but no
obligation to create subscriber records exists).
Even if it did .. academic institutions are exempt (to CALEA) as private
networks.*
There are
Hello,
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
In the US, I believe that CALEA requires you to have those records for 7
years.
FWIW, in Argentina there is a requirement to hold all records for a full ten
years. A sweet bite for the storage folks here...
regards,
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 15:51:32 -0400
From: Michael Holstein michael.holst...@csuohio.edu
In the US, I believe that CALEA requires you to have those records for 7
years.
No, it doesn't (records *of the requests* are required, but no
obligation to create subscriber records
On May 10, 2011, at 3:51 32PM, Michael Holstein wrote:
In the US, I believe that CALEA requires you to have those records for 7
years.
No, it doesn't (records *of the requests* are required, but no
obligation to create subscriber records exists).
Even if it did .. academic
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Steven Bellovin s...@cs.columbia.edu wrote:
If I've found the right case, it was 05-1404, and published as 451 F.3d 226
(2006);
see http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/451/226/627290/
I have no idea if it's still good law.
According to
--As of May 10, 2011 9:37:55 AM -0400, Jon Lewis is alleged to have said:
I wonder how things go if you challenge them in court. This is surely a
topic for another list, but it seems to me it'd be fairly difficult to
prove unless they downloaded part of the movie from your IP and verified
that
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Mark Radabaugh m...@amplex.net wrote:
On 5/10/11 9:07 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A good reason why every ISP should have a published civil subpoena
compliance fee.
23,000 * $150 each should only cost them $3.45M to get the information.
Seems like that would
Deepak Jain wrote:
For examples, see the RIAA's attempts and more recently the criminal investigations of child porn downloads from
unsecured access
points. From what I understand (or wildly guess) is that ISPs with remote diagnostic capabilities are being asked if
their
provided access point
Hi，
I am not an US citizen and I don't live in US. But I am interested to
know how the case progress, because we have similar such cases in my
country. :P
But seriously, are they after the end-user or making the ISP responsible
for their end-user ?
while, I am not a lawyer, so what after
On May 10, 2011, at 9:53 16PM, Michael Painter wrote:
Deepak Jain wrote:
For examples, see the RIAA's attempts and more recently the criminal
investigations of child porn downloads from unsecured access
points. From what I understand (or wildly guess) is that ISPs with remote
diagnostic
On 5/10/11 8:30 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Mark Radabaughm...@amplex.net wrote:
On 5/10/11 9:07 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A good reason why every ISP should have a published civil subpoena
compliance fee.
23,000 * $150 each should only cost them $3.45M to get the
101 - 200 of 521 matches
Mail list logo
