3 strike law, who has had a notice sent?

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › 3 strike law, who has had a notice sent?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

17111 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1176294 15-Nov-2014 14:02

gehenna:
lNomNoml: Didn't even know what this was until I looked it up, sounds pretty bs to me, who gives them the right to see what I am doing on the net.
The law.

This is an interesting question. The monitoring companies are using publicly available information from torrent trackers. They track that IP to an ISP and send the notice to the ISP. The ISP is required by law to send that notice to you.

CYaBro

4583 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1176313 15-Nov-2014 14:20

gzt:
gehenna:
lNomNoml: Didn't even know what this was until I looked it up, sounds pretty bs to me, who gives them the right to see what I am doing on the net.
The law.

This is an interesting question. The monitoring companies are using publicly available information from torrent trackers. They track that IP to an ISP and send the notice to the ISP. The ISP is required by law to send that notice to you.

If the company sending the notice pays the fee to have the ISP send it onto the end user.

Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1176354 15-Nov-2014 16:27

SaltyNZ:
nakedmolerat:
coffeebaron: So how do they track you if you are behind CG-NAT? Perhaps the censor should be eying these providers too :)

This is the interesting point. Our ISP provider EOL CEO somewhere in the newspaper mentioned that his network would not receive this 3 strikes because of the CG- NAT. He somehow use this as a selling point? I think that what was implied when I read the article

I suspect the answer to that question is: if the ISP receives a valid notice, it's their problem to figure out exactly who to send it to. 'It's pretty hard to do' isn't an acceptable excuse.

If you are behind a VPN etc then my understanding is that your ISP actually has no idea of what you are doing, and the IP address anyone monitoring your traffic obtains won't match the one you are connected through. The ISP will never get the notice, the VPN company will, and if you have picked one outside NZ then they aren't required to do anything to comply.

(Note: for the avoidance of doubt, I don't torrent stuff. I must be one of the few people left on the planet who doesn't torrent books, films and music)

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1176371 15-Nov-2014 17:33

SaltyNZ:
nakedmolerat:
coffeebaron: So how do they track you if you are behind CG-NAT? Perhaps the censor should be eying these providers too :)

This is the interesting point. Our ISP provider EOL CEO somewhere in the newspaper mentioned that his network would not receive this 3 strikes because of the CG- NAT. He somehow use this as a selling point? I think that what was implied when I read the article

I suspect the answer to that question is: if the ISP receives a valid notice, it's their problem to figure out exactly who to send it to. 'It's pretty hard to do' isn't an acceptable excuse.

Well EOL also offer wireless access town wide. You can go and pay cash for your Internet access - get random codes. It's almost impossible, unless they have cctv running and record who paid for the access. Even then it could be someone else buying the access for the relative at the hospital etc.

gzt

17111 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1176396 15-Nov-2014 18:15

JimmyH: (Note: for the avoidance of doubt, I don't torrent stuff. I must be one of the few people left on the planet who doesn't torrent books, films and music)

Subject JimmyH, I find your denial suspicious and worthy of further investigation. Using the torrent protocol is not a crime.

gzt

17111 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1176398 15-Nov-2014 18:19

JimmyH:
SaltyNZ:
nakedmolerat:
coffeebaron: So how do they track you if you are behind CG-NAT? Perhaps the censor should be eying these providers too :)

This is the interesting point. Our ISP provider EOL CEO somewhere in the newspaper mentioned that his network would not receive this 3 strikes because of the CG- NAT. He somehow use this as a selling point? I think that what was implied when I read the article

I suspect the answer to that question is: if the ISP receives a valid notice, it's their problem to figure out exactly who to send it to. 'It's pretty hard to do' isn't an acceptable excuse.

If you are behind a VPN etc then my understanding is that your ISP actually has no idea of what you are doing, and the IP address anyone monitoring your traffic obtains won't match the one you are connected through. The ISP will never get the notice, the VPN company will, and if you have picked one outside NZ then they aren't required to do anything to comply.

This is correct. The copyright law does not authorise spying. Well sort of..

mattwnz

20147 posts

Uber Geek

#1176402 15-Nov-2014 18:37

myfullflavour: We get sent notices all the time from various US studios.

Here's the kicker:

No one ever want to pay the fee we are entitled to charge for passing the notices on, so said notices end up in the department of no one cares.

Should they be sending them, if they are not sending payment with them?

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1176861 16-Nov-2014 16:52

gzt:
JimmyH: (Note: for the avoidance of doubt, I don't torrent stuff. I must be one of the few people left on the planet who doesn't torrent books, films and music)

Subject JimmyH, I find your denial suspicious and worthy of further investigation. Using the torrent protocol is not a crime.

Investigate away (although it beats me how you plan to do that?).

Fully aware that the torrent protocol itself isn't a crime. No need to torrent ebooks (I have a lot), or films (the capture box hooked up to my sky box feeds more content to the network than I can realistically watch anyway), and there simply isn't much new music I'm interested in these days.

I put that aside in to stop the thread going down a rabbit-hole of what various people were doing, and stop the usual "technically it's illegal...." crowd taking the thread off topic.

gzt

17111 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1176926 16-Nov-2014 18:19

Sorry mate it was a failed attempt at 1984 humor on my part.

Edit: and to point out the obvious: the kind of copyright violation mentioned is not a crime in NZ anyway.

raytaylor

4014 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1176933 16-Nov-2014 18:34

How do they track you?
The most common way is a honey trap.
The content owner of the movie or song will hire a law firm or company to set up computers which join a torrent. They download and seed the torrent. They simply leave the peers tab of the torrent page open (like you can on your computer) and make notes of the ip addresses which download pieces from them.

Those are passed upstairs to the lawyers who send the letter to your ISP.

Am I safe if i download only books?
It is up to the owner of the content - that is the book publisher, or the music record label, or the movie studio, or the band members to set up the honey traps and hire the people to write the formal letters. If they dont want to spend the money on doing that, or dont want to do it themselves, then you wont get caught as the letter or strike notice can only come from the content owner, or the representative they authorise to act on their behalf.

I dont torrent or download, I only stream. Am I safe?
It is possible that a content owner may get a law enforcement agency to shut down an overseas streaming website, and in the process of suing the website, will get access to their server logs. If your ip address appears as one that made a streaming connection then yes you can still get caught. Its not as likely as torrenting, but it is very much possible.

How does the ISP track you?
The ISP does not track you.
They receive a letter from the content owner or their representative that says ip address x.y.z.x was downloading a specific file at a certain time, from the ip address a.b.c.a. The ISP simply looks up which customer had the ip address x.y.z.x at that time and once accepting the government regulated fee, will send on the message. The ISP keeps track of your strikes and will place a mark against your name. They reply to the complainant and let them know if this is your first, second, third strike.

Will CG-NAT protect me?
Nope it will not. If your ISP uses CG-NAT they are still required to be able to identify you.
This is a GIANT BIG LOOPHOLE IN THE LAW THAT THE STUPID BILL WRITERS FORGOT.
The isp will maintain connection logs of your service. Eg. they can tell that customer 192.168.0.1 made a connection to a.b.c.a at that time on port 34433 and will be able to pass on the letter to you from that log entry.
HOWEVER it is reasonable to accept that an ISP will only maintain these logs for a month. '
It usually also takes longer than a month for the letter to arrive from most overseas content owners who hire representatives.
So CG-NAT can protect you - but it can also make it super easy to confirm that you definitely were the one because the ISP will be more inclined to log your connections for verification out of necessity.

In our case, most of our subscribers now have public ip addresses because logging connections uses terrabytes and terrabytes of storage that we dont have.
For public ip addresses we still log for 7 days, for CG-NAT we log for 30 days.
There is nothing stopping us (other than unreasonable excessive requirements for storage space) from logging public ip subscriber connections for longer and using it as a way to verify if the letter is accurate in its reports that a connection was indeed made.

Bigger ISPs may have different policies on how long they log connections for.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

Talkiet

4792 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1176936 16-Nov-2014 18:39

raytaylor: [snip]
I dont torrent or download, I only stream. Am I safe?
It is possible that a content owner may get a law enforcement agency to shut down an overseas streaming website, and in the process of suing the website, will get access to their server logs. If your ip address appears as one that made a streaming connection then yes you can still get caught. Its not as likely as torrenting, but it is very much possible.

I'd HIGHLY doubt that logs from untrusted 3rd parties would satisfy the requirements for a valid notice.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

gzt

17111 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1176944 16-Nov-2014 18:58

I don't recall any geekzone discussion where someone got a notice. There have been some in the wider news.

Jaxson

8042 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1927118 30-Dec-2017 19:51

What’s the state of play with this several years on?

Are people still receiving letters for offences?

I read somewhere, but can’t find the article now, that the overheads associated with monitoring and tracking down offenders was proving too much/cost prohibitive to continue?

There seemed to be an inconsistent message at the time, with regards to streaming copyright content from a single point vs p2p torrenting of the file itself. Both are unauthorised viewing of the content, but only one method was covered by the law change specifically.

Keen to hear others experiences in late 2017/2018.

tehgerbil

1102 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Subscriber

#1927119 30-Dec-2017 19:53

I would love one, would frame it and hang it on the wall for sh1ts and giggles. :)

Starscream122

568 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1927141 30-Dec-2017 20:57

I torrent the latest movies and tv series and I have never got a letter and I'm not using a VPN.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4