[Toto]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I fully agree with you. My main worry is that the isps will see this as a reason to push for access to the data from the equipment they are forced to install. They could say that the money made from access to the data will help fund the cost of supplying the large amount of data that COULD be requested by the lawyers who jump on the bandwagon of sue sue sue.

Its a lot of could's or if's but it makes me worried as to where we will end up with this.

---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 ----------



I feel that the Deep packet inspection kit to be installed in half of VM's network will not only be used for p2p checking. It will in my eye's evolve very quickly when they see the benefits of a phorm type off shoot.

Why would they need DPI kit for this? I have read through the PDF file, and it appears that the evidence has to be supplied by the Rights Holder, there is no internal evidence gathering, for example.....

1.2 The DEA imposed new obligations on Internet Service providers (“ISPs”) to send notifications to their subscribers following receipt of reports of copyright infringement from Copyright Owners. ISPs must also record the number of reports made against their subscribers and provide Copyright Owners on request with an anonymised list which enables the Copyright Owner to see which of the reports it has made are linked to the same subscriber – also known as the ‘copyright infringement list’.

That does not seem to imply that ISP's must install DPI kit, it says that the evidence must be supplied by the Rights owner.

So, I am still trying to work out how this will benefit the ISP financially.