[governance] Re: France To Require Internet Service Providers To Filter Infringing Music

[Dan Krimm]

At 1:18 AM +0100 11/28/07, Meryem Marzouki wrote:
>Le 27 nov. 07 à 22:25, Dan Krimm a écrit :
>
>> Another question I heard elsewhere is: does the deep packet inspection
>> violate EU privacy laws?
>
>I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "deep packet inspection"
>here?

In order to detect infringement, the content must be identified as it is
passed through the net.  In your earlier message you referred to it as
"filtering techniques" such as provided by Audible Magic (also referenced
in the title of this email thread).

Perhaps, as you noted, this must be in conjunction with IP addresses, etc.,
to identify the supposed infringers.  I guess it comes down to the status
of the "legal order" to get the identifying info in the case of claimed
infringement.  Would this proposed system create some sort of "blanket
legal order" to allow bulk access to identifying info in case of flagging
of infringing content in the filtering system?

Even if the IP address "is not personal data" anymore in France, at some
point they do have to get some personal data to prosecute the claim, so at
some point there are personal data involved, and one would assume that at
that point the privacy laws would kick in somehow, unless the identifying
path is so "spread out" that the law cannot catch it at any specific point
in the path.




>> Bottom line, yes this is distinctly alarming.  Then again, it could
>> simply
>> lead to P2P developers designing encrypted distributed-P2P
>> applications to
>> foil the DPI.
>
>Frankly, I don't think that this race is a solution (further
>encryption then further criminalization, etc.). The only solution
>would be an adapted economic model to the online distribution of
>music and videos (a la 'legal licence' or flatfee), but there is
>still a long way to go..

Absolutely agree -- I've been a big fan of collective licensing for a long
time (I tend to prefer licensing fully interactive music subscription
services that can tally their own in-system use, rather than trying to
monitor content transferred on the entire Internet to allocate fees
collected at ISPs, but there are a number of varieties to discuss, and I'm
happy to consider the pros and cons of them all).

IFPI and RIAA have not come around to this way of thinking yet, though.
It's really a shame.  But not surprising, since a truly merit-based legal
system would undermine major labels' gatekeeper control over the music
market, and it seems they still just can't stomach that.

These are some of the worst bad boys of the copyright-maximalist camp, and
it is disappointing (but perhaps not surprising) that Sarkozy has thrown
his lot in with them.

Dan

PS -- Note: I am not a copyright minimalist or abolitionist.  I believe
there is balance still possible, in an "optimalist" stance, as long as we
abandon the idea of trying to control fixations as leverage for payment,
and concentrate simply on anonymously monitoring use and compensating on
that basis from royalty pools collected at points of bulk access.  There is
a potential for a win-win solution where information can move freely
(unfettered) without being unpaid, by charging at the gates to the full
catalog instead of charging for individual works (but royalty allocation is
still on the basis of popularity of use, thus creating a real
differentiated-value marketplace).

But it seems that it will be still quite some time before the major labels
can stomach this model, if ever.  They may really have to completely
crumble before we can move forward.  It's disappointing that they are so
stubborn, but it is their own undoing in the end, unless they can convince
governments to take the Draconian steps to lock down control of information.

I hope the Parliament does not create the law to establish this new
authority, and if it does I hope that there will be a stiff legal challenge
to bring it down.  This idea is really, really scary.

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance