[pp.int.general] [Algemeen] Fwd: European Commission / Institute of International and European Affairs Internet Project

Nicolas Sahlqvist nicco77 at gmail.com
Tue Mar 9 22:03:50 CET 2010

Excellent, strike one! ;)

I took the liberty of forwarding this to the gneral PPI and YPI list, any
other PP or YP who want to provide input to IIEA?

- Nicolas
  PPI Member

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Sven Olaf Kamphuis <sven at cb3rob.net> wrote:

> Hi,
> We received your email by forward from another isp/telco, and yes, we can
> help you with some aspects of your Request For Comments document.
> We do have certain remarks tho :P
> 1: regarding article 8 of your RFC
> Why is this fictional "copyright" thing even mentioned (it lacks any
> democratic base), and politicians work for the EU population, not for
> some american kartells. (if i'm not mistaken ;)
> the concept of copyright law lacks:
> - A democratic base (noone would be in favour of a law that can put 99% of
> the population in prison  or imposed fines upon if enforced 100%
> - Legal feasability from both "sides" (my computer can and has generated
> all possible musical patterns a few years ago allready, so it can just as
> well be used to stop anyone from publishing anything in the future)..
> - An economic base (isps and telcos generate a lot of VAT for the EU, the
> copyright industry does not.)
> - Copyright only seems to find application to some "forms" of art, computer
> programmers for example, hardy ever obtain royalties,
> and frankly, don't care about it as their business model isn't
> such an utter failure that it needs such to stay "profitable".
> - It's kinda funny that your RFC mentions "injunctions on service providers
> that provide services to third parties that infringe copyright" in chapter
> 8, this causes additional costs and loss of profit for the internet industry
> and facilitate easy censorship with lacking legal arguments i'd say they
> have to get a valid court verdict -first-...
> The MPAA/RIAA's arguments don't hold any factual base in most cases anyway.
> claiming "copyright" on movies filmed in a cinema, with added or removed
> parts, compressed, all constitute a "derivative work" by any countries
> copyright law. (even the copyright act of the USA)
> With regards to copyright, its better to just drop the whole thing as its
> not a working concept. get rid of the berne convention so companies like the
> MPAA/RIAA members can adjust their business model and simply sell their
> stuff worldwide directly. (if done properly, they may even be motivated to
> move -their- offices to the EU so they can pay taxes here..)
> In the end everyone has to make money, but we isps are definately not gonna
> clean up their mess caused by their lacking business model for them.
> The RIAA/MPAA have pushed the laws that now prevent them from selling
> "their" content to a worldwide market (berne convention, various other
> treaties) by corruption, and refuse to adapt to the new global market.
> -their problem-, stop covering their ass, they're a lost case.
> also take into consideration that ISPs and telcos OWN the internet.
> all the wires, switches, routers belong to us, the internet industry.
> governments piggyback their economy on it (atm machines, online banking,
> etc) and that's fine with us, but by no means an absolute -right-.
> It would by the way be appreciated if net-neutrality would be legally
> enforced, so that not only the state(s) obtain a right to have their packets
> relayed unmodified, but anyone else too, at this moment, this is purely done
> based on "it's in everyone's interest"...
> I must however admit we have frequently considered it no longer to be in
> our interest to relay packets to and from let's say Disney or SonyBMG or
> Paramount Pictures "unmodified", as they clearly are attacking isps and the
> concept of net neutrality as a whole... some regulation in that aspect would
> be appreciated.
> So whose interest would the EU rather represent, and do keep in mind, ISPs
> in the content industry can conduct business (and pay taxes) in any of the
> countries around the globe (we, for example, have had offers...)
> The internet industry provides a critical infrastructure, pretty much free
> of charge, and will route anyones packets anywere, unmodified, no questions
> asked, however, we do demand that countries we pay taxes to cover our ass,
> not the asses of some american companies that merely provide lousy
> "entertainment", which is of no interest to the european economy whatsoever.
> Artists are by no means "poor", they can work for their money like everyone
> else. (live performances, ordered works, and simply selling online directly,
> or including the advertisment into the work, skipping the "tv station" step
> ;), however fixing their business model isn't a task of the government(s),
> they simply have to come up with something that works without undemocratic
> corrupt laws by themselves.
> people have made music and books and sung songs since they lived in cages.
> no copyright was ever needed to "make" them do that.
> 2:
> Why is this content-related only, and doesn't it mention -real- threats to
> the services based EU economy, such as ddos attacks and how
> to have them dealth with legally. (currently this is cumbersome process).
> Easily accessible and competent law enforcement is missing in most EU
> countries
> Most of the ISPs/Telcos just consider this "part of the game" and live with
> it, however it must be noted that it does cause significant economical
> damage, and in my opinion, should not be "just part of the game" as its
> actually serious crime, that simply lacks enforcement options at this time.
> (we have lists and lists and lists of hacked botnet nodes, for example, and
> getting them shut down and analysed is a pain in the ass.)
> 3: regarding your "other forms of censorship"
> In case a valid and applicable court order is present, we surely will
> disconnect those, and as those cases are not as controversial as some
> american firms claiming they  would make a loss (which they can't prove
> anyway) as in the copyright cases, we usually would not make a problem of
> it.
> Now as for "fictional" child porn, we consider banning this a breach of the
> sexual freedom of "pedophiles", which are a segment of the population
> too which  cannot be discriminated against, furthermore no factual damage
> is inflicted upon anyone or the state, so this lacks any legal basis, its
> more of opening a door to censorship.
> So, time to make laws that actually represent what -our- population and
> industry wants, rather than a bunch of kartels from one of our ex-colonies.
> --
> greetings,
> Sven Olaf Kamphuis
> On behalf of
> CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG
> AS34109
> Member of Piratenpartei Deutschland
> Member of Piratenpartij Nederland
>> -------- Originele bericht --------
>> The European Commission has invited us, the Institute of International and
>> European Affairs (IIEA) (www.iiea.com) to undertake a very important
>> project. We have been commissioned to study current practices against
>> illegal internet content in the EU to determine whether any should be
>> adopted to prevent the spread of illegal violent radical content online.
>> This survey is an excellent opportunity for leading EU ISP's to directly
>> influence the course of European policy in this area. Your input and
>> participation is of critical importance.
>> Our objective is to understand ISPs' efforts to tackle illegal content,
>> how
>> they interact with hotlines and law enforcement, and what are the
>> strengths
>> and weaknesses of existing approaches to illegal content. I am wondering
>> would your organisation be able to please forward this short survey to
>> your
>> three or four four largest members and ask them to complete or complete it
>> yourself? Any assistance you could offer would be grately appreciated.
>> For further information on this study please see
>> http://www.iiea.com/staff?workingGroupUrlKey=violent-radicalisation. We
>> very
>> much look forward to receiving your input and bringing it to the attention
>> of the European Commission. We are contacting the major ISps across the EU
>> territory for their input as this is a superb chance for ISps to voice
>> their
>> opinions on what future policy should look like in this area.
>> *NOTE*: I appreciate ISPs are extremely busy but we would be extremely
>> appreciative if the ISPs could answer ALL questions enclosed and if you
>> they
>> respond to us with requisite survey results ideally no later than *TEN
>> DAYS*of receipt of this email.
>> 1. Is this something your organisation can help us with?
>> 2. On our website there is an RFC document
>> http://www.iiea.com/blogosphere/rfc2 We would greatly appreciate it if
>> you
>> could look at our section on your country and see if it is accurate. For
>> example have we included all the relevant information, is there anything
>> missing that we can add, is the information accurate?
>> Kind regards,
>> Adrian Bannon
>> Digital Policy Researcher
>> Institute of International and European Affairs
>> 8 North Great George's Street
>> Dublin 1
>> Ireland
>> www.iiea.com
>> email: adrian.bannon at iiea.com
>> Tel: +353 (0) 18 74 90 02
>> Fax: +353 (0) 18 78 68 80
>>  _______________________________________________
> Algemeen mailing list
> Algemeen at lists.piratenpartij.nl
> http://lists.piratenpartij.nl/mailman/listinfo/algemeen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20100309/22796d63/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the pp.international.general mailing list