http://www.20min.ch/schweiz/news/story/Schweiz-laesst-illegale-Downloader-la...
has two interesting parts in there:
8<---------------------------------------- Die Arbeitsgruppe empfiehlt, dass die Provider die fehlbaren Konsumenten auf die möglichen Folgen ihres Handelns hinweisen müssen. Dauert der schwerwiegende Rechtsverstoss an, soll der Provider dem Rechtsinhaber die Identität bekannt geben, damit dieser seine zivilrechtlichen Ansprüche geltend machen kann. ---------------------------------------->8
8<----------------------------------------- Zugang sperren
Um illegalen Angeboten einen Riegel zu schieben, schlug die Arbeitsgruppe auch strengere Regeln für Provider vor. Betroffen wären zum einen Hosting Provider, also Anbieter von Inhalten. Auf Anzeige hin sollen sie unerlaubt hochgeladene Inhalte entfernen müssen.
Zum anderen wären Access Provider betroffen, also Zugangsanbieter wie die Swisscom. Sie sollen in schwerwiegenden Fällen den Zugang zu Webportalen mit offensichtlich illegalen Quellen sperren. Zu diesem Vorschlag hat sich der Bundesrat am Freitag nicht geäussert. ----------------------------------------->8
So Hosting Providers will be accountable under those regulations, and if it goes as they want, ISPs might have to start force-blocking sites.
The first part is okay-ish, even though sometimes a hoster has no control over the subject.
The second part though is very worrying. If $some_organisation can order ISPs to block content, the door is opened to block all kinds of random content.
And of course there is the question about how that blocking will be taking place, next to the simple fact that blocks at the ISP level will be circumvented by a lot of people who will get some kind of VPN...
Hence, what folks here are working on/together-with to get clarity in the government and to sort this out so that they are not going to restrict our intertubes?!
Greets, Jeroen
Hi Jeroen
this was in the NZZ too. I find the first part of you quotes much worse than the second one.
Dauert der schwerwiegende Rechtsverstoss an, soll der Provider dem Rechtsinhaber die Identität bekannt geben, damit dieser seine zivilrechtlichen Ansprüche geltend machen kann.
In essence it means, that the intellectual property people now have easier access to private data than say law enforcement, circumventing every legal principle I know. Whatever is decided on the legality of certain actions, its courts that should diced if the law was broken, not some legal department of a large company.
Never the less: Schöne Pfingsten
Serge
On 2014-06-07 11:01, Serge Droz wrote:
Hi Jeroen
this was in the NZZ too. I find the first part of you quotes much worse than the second one.
Dauert der schwerwiegende Rechtsverstoss an, soll der Provider dem Rechtsinhaber die Identität bekannt geben, damit dieser seine zivilrechtlichen Ansprüche geltend machen kann.
In essence it means, that the intellectual property people now have easier access to private data than say law enforcement, circumventing every legal principle I know. Whatever is decided on the legality of certain actions, its courts that should diced if the law was broken, not some legal department of a large company.
It depends on how you read that sentence indeed, I would expect still a real law enforcement to be involved for determining that some rights have been "violated"; which would not happen unless you are uploading (hence bittorrent can be considered wrong per default in that context, unless you share your Linux ISOs from your home dsl link ;)
IMHO it would be in the interest of providers to be involved in this process, as their helpdesk + legal costs will go up through the roof if various large-multi-billion-dollar "media" companies start knocking on their doors directly when some random user has done something wrong in their eyes.
As for the blocking part (the second portion), that would be rather bad too if that would become possible, especially if a third party will be able to demand those blockages.
Greets, Jeroen
Ho Jeroen
On 07/06/14 11:40, Jeroen Massar wrote:
It depends on how you read that sentence indeed, I would expect still a real law enforcement to be involved for determining that some rights have been "violated";
Not if you listent to the presentation: Free culture oder Verlust der Kultur? at the Providerday 2013 (http://www.simsa.ch/2013/04/25/trusted-hosting-einladung-zum-provider-day-20...)
Quote: "We want to keep it simple: It's easiest if the ISPs give us the name and address of a downloader, and we can then settle the issue out of court".
I'm not arguing pro or con Copyright, but I don't want to see the law in the hands of large (or small) corporations.
Cheers Serge
On 2014-06-07 13:48, Serge Droz wrote:
Ho Jeroen
On 07/06/14 11:40, Jeroen Massar wrote:
It depends on how you read that sentence indeed, I would expect still a real law enforcement to be involved for determining that some rights have been "violated";
Not if you listent to the presentation: Free culture oder Verlust der Kultur? at the Providerday 2013 (http://www.simsa.ch/2013/04/25/trusted-hosting-einladung-zum-provider-day-20...)
Quote: "We want to keep it simple: It's easiest if the ISPs give us the name and address of a downloader, and we can then settle the issue out of court".
I don't see that quote there, and I don't seem to find the slides either (but maybe I am missing out on a link somewhere :)
An ISP IMHO is not allowed to give out that information to a third party unless that 3rd party is of the official Swiss government law enforcement type. (read: requests from foreign law enforcement should IMHO be redirected to the Swiss one, or simply replied that that they have to do that)
If an ISP does provide a person's private data (be that address, name, IP-addresses, content, etc) I would consider that a privacy invasion.
Any large company with enough money to sue ISPs could and will then just start asking for private details of every single person.
Bypassing the court "it is easier" is stating exactly that: we'll just pressure people into doing what we as corporations want.
That really should never happen.
The Code of Conduct is easy to find. http://www.simsa.ch/2013/03/01/simsa-code-of-conduct-hosting-regeln-fuer-den...
The 2014 edition also had a couple of interesting results on this: http://static.simsa.ch/1399537164/simsa_providerday_2014_praesentationen_.ra... and then in there there is: AufderMaur_auswertung-umfrage-20140422_Version 05.05.14
From what I see there this Code of Conduct is a good thing.
I'm not arguing pro or con Copyright, but I don't want to see the law in the hands of large (or small) corporations.
I can only fully agree with you. Other countries already have that and they are not doing well that way.
I am happy to know there are people on this list along with other names I see in the agenda involved in those discussions and protecting the proper interests of the Internet and the people.
Greets, Jeroen
-
Jeroen Massar -
Serge Droz