NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
NNSquad Home Page
NNSquad Mailing List Information
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ NNSquad ] Re: Speculation, how AT&T can implement "copyright filtering" without wiretapping/dpi...
- To: Richard Bennett <email@example.com>
- Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: Speculation, how AT&T can implement "copyright filtering" without wiretapping/dpi...
- From: Edward Almasy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:44:07 -0600
- Cc: email@example.com, Nick Weaver <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Jan 27, 2008, at 10:35 PM, Richard Bennett wrote:
I presented this technique at the NN2008 symposium yesterday. I
showed a screen-grab from Mininova showing pirated Microsoft
Office, and the peer list from an Azureus leecher. It's pretty easy
to connect the dots from Microsoft's monitoring of the tracker to
action by an ISP in response to electronic requests from the
copyright owner. One technique that comes to mind for stoppng
piracy transactions is Reset Spoofing, of course.
Is there any reason that such an automated system should not be
used, or does Net Neutrality now connote a license to steal?
(It'd be nice if we could avoid the "Am I right, or is anyone who
disagrees evil incarnate?" type of flame-baiting false dichotomy.)
The idea of blocking pirated content in a targeted fashion sounds
very attractive, however there would seem to be two big (and
intertwined) problems with it as suggested:
1) Who decides what is prohibited content? A pirated copy of the
latest Hollywood movie is an obvious call, but based on past
experience it seems almost certain that once the mechanism is in
place and organizations like the MPAA are effectively in control of
it, the practice will become "block first and ask (i.e. ignore)
questions later" on anything they decide might be objectionable, with
little recourse available to those who are blocked.
2) What happens when (inevitably, in response) technology comes into
common use that obfuscates the content? Again, based on past
experience, my guess would be that the MPAA et al will decide that
any content they suspect and can't examine/identify could be
objectionable and should be blocked.
Targeted blocking may ultimately be a good solution, if coupled with
due process, but implementing the enforcement mechanism and handing
the keys over to the MPAA/RIAA/etc doesn't seem like a wise course.