[Nlnog] Case ID 369XXXX - Notice of Claimed Infringement

[Jim Segrave]

On Wed 14 Jul 2004 (15:17 +0200), Jaap O Mark wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Jaap O Mark wrote:
> > 
> > > Denk dat providers eerder geen zin hebben om hier (onnodig) tijd &
> > > resources in te steken, laat staan discussies met de klant. Het lijkt
> > > met niet dat je er echt klanten mee WINT.
> > 
> > Ik denk dat XS4ALL daar heel anders over denkt. Ik weet vrij zeker dat
> > XS4ALL behoorlijk wat klanten te danken heeft aan haar opstelling in dit
> > soort zaken (en het daarmee gepaard gaande imago).
> 
> Daar heb je gelijk in, echter kwam dit natuurlijk door de bijbehorende
> rechtzaak & publiciteit. Met de slogan 'wij geven geen adresgegevens aan
> derden zonder gerechtelijk bevel' alleen win je niet veel klanten.
> XS4ALL hield/houdt ook voet bij stuk, waar andere providers dit soms niet
> doen.

Whether an ISP advertiese it or not, it has a legal duty to not give
NAW out without sound legal grounds. It's my understanding that short
of a court order, an ISP would be taking a serious legal risk in
volunteering NAW.

Simply ignoring the complaints also carries a possible risk that an
ISP could be found culpable for not having take action. 

Demon currently sends a form to the complainer asking them to give
full details of the copyright ownership etc. and, at the same time, we
send the customer a warning that there has been a complaint and point
out that our AV says they must not use their connectivity for illegal
purposes. However, I don't think we've ever had a completed form back
from a complainer (Paramount for a long time sent these messages out
with an email address that bounced). If we did receive one, we would
require the customer to send us a written undertaking to remove the
disputed material, or an explanation of why the complaint is
unfounded, otherwise they risk being diconnected. It's our belief that
this is sufficient to show that we have acted in a reasonable and
proper manner. We would not give NAW without an signed order from a
rechter or a change in the Privacy Wet. I suppose that if BREIN or
Disney or whomever were to file a civil suit, they would have no
trouble getting such an order and I can't see we'd have any choice but
to comply. But a request for those details so they could prepare such
an lawsuit would be refused.

However, I would strongly advise every ISP to get their own legal
advice on this subject, the potential financial risks of getting it
wrong are not insubstantial and a group of techies is not the best
place to ensure you've minimised those risks.

-- 
Jim Segrave           jes at nl.demon.net