Comments on: Swedish ISPs vow to erase users' traffic data

In more fallout from a Swedish antipiracy law that went into effect April 1, some of the country ISPs say they will erase IP data to protect their customers' privacy.

[pithenumber]

"It's astonishing that someone who claims to be a serious communication operator wants to assist in crime, which is implied by what (ISPs) are doing"
its not a crime in Sweden
remember, the dmca and all that sh|7 doesn't apply over there

[Lerianis3]

Unfortunately, they like to conveniently forget that. The fact is that the ISP's should NOT be monitoring what I am putting over my connection without a court warrant. They shouldn't even be keeping records of which IP addresses I have (even non-dynamic IP's I have found are somewhat dynamic, they just change VERY rarely, about every month).

[Sausagebiscuit]

The US/UK gov't reason for logging is to help fight terrorism. -_-

[contentcreator--2008]

Lerianis3 --- right to privacy is not a right to anonymous crime. "My connection" --- it's not yours, it's not exclusively in your house, you don't own it. File sharing is an inherently public act, and no right to privacy should or can be inferred. It's like running down the street naked and claiming no one can arrest you because you have a right to privacy.

An ISP has no obligation to shield you from prosecution---it is their records of their actions (assigning IP addresses) on their equipment on their premises---and compelling them to keep those records would be consistent with typical record-keeping activities businesses are regularly required to engage in.

[Burre83]

The issue is not so much about piracy as it is about personal security. IPRED is comparable to letting third parties tell UPS that they would like to inspect all packages you send/receive or tapping your landline/cell. I could care less about piracy, but if the weapon of choice here in Sweden is to surrender your internet privacy then something needs to be done. So much stuff is done via internet these days that protecting that integrity is important. If traditional police work is not enough to stop piracy then we should think hard and long if we shouldn't just admit defeat and instead find other ways to profit on media. Hulu (even though it isn't available in Sweden) is a good example of a way to fight TV/movie piracy, Spotify/Last.fm is a good way to profit on music etc. There are solutions available if only the IP holders are willing to surrender some control.

Making money from physical media is not a human right, it is not a part of the constitution, if the technology changes so must the market. I don't see any monks translating books by hand. Their business died with the introduction of the printing press and it might well be that some current businesses will face the same fate. There is demand for media and there are good distribution methods in place to profit from it, improve those instead of trying to put the genie back in the bottle. Pirated media will always have a bigger availability than the physical media, if IP holders think that they can suppress unsanctioned copying they are sorely mistaken. Even the most draconian DRM systems will leak through the analogue hole. Music label are terrified because historically distribution and promotion have been their livelihood and now they have been playing so defensively for so long that their role has diminished since distribution is so simple. The gap between musicians and consumers have shrunk in turn weakening their position. THAT is what this war is really about, enforcing control, "save" an aging business model by added legislations. This war is not about producers and consumers, it is about the middle man battling for control of distribution. I spent more money on live concert last year than I've ever spent on spent on discs (and I have a quite healthy library). Music is still a performance art in my mind, where the biggest bands draw the biggest crowds and make the most amount of money. My prediction is that increased availability probably have helped small and medium sized bands to find bigger and new crowds.

Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails are good examples of bands finding a way to profit on new technology rather than fighting it (because it will be futile in the end). But this doesn't only profit huge and established bands. A local example here in Sweden is the singer/songwriter Sofia Talvik (http://www.sofiatalvik.com/) who is giving away remixes of her music, using social media to spread the word and doing free concerts at charities etc making internet a marketing tool. An American "grassroots" example of using the net to his advantage is Pronobozo (http://www.pronobozo.com/fans_only.php) who gives much of his music, allows podcasts and other shows to freely use it, because he understands that getting a lot of play is the best promotion you can get.

The new internet market wont work for everyone, some business will not survive the transition. But that is how it is and that is how it always have been for all professions. Some disappears and new ones arises. In 30 year no one might be able to make a living on selling physical media, but then again, 30 years ago virtually no one made any money developing software.

Stimulating the market with nonsensical/tailored laws by lobby organizations will not hold forever, and it is most certainly not worth surrendering our liberties over.

[mdsudan]

contentcreator - First i believe that in several countries in the world there is still a debate on whether content sharing is a crime. Many major ones like Sweden recently have ruled that it is.

Lerianis3's comment is about monitoring and not about enforcement. Expanding your analogy of "running naked on streets"... the ISPs are expected to have cameras on all streets starting from your entrance to your driveway expecting people will run naked, that i think is a privacy violation.

The EU laws are clear in stating that and basically the ISP has the right to retain or not record as they so wish. And if they do retain then law enforcement can get it through a warrant.

[ajhoughton]

"its not a crime in Sweden
remember, the dmca and all that sh|7 doesn't apply over there"

EUCD *does* cover Sweden, and says basically the same things as DMCA. Furthermore, as far as I'm aware, Sweden still has a copyright law, just like most other countries.

[darfjono]

@Burre83

*golf clap*

[Gambit642]

@ contentcreator--2008
Your example has one fundamental flaw. It doesn't account for the innocent. If you are a offender you have no right to argue privacy, as you have proven you've not discipline...however if your neighbor (or someone you have never met) chooses to exploit their rights, what gives anyone the right to infringe on my right to privacy. You are missing the big picture. Decisions like this don't effectively target the guilty, you are advocating that everyone should be punished.

[dougjake]

Bravo to the Swedish ISPs!

[lizuk22]

The new internet market wont work for everyone, some business will not survive the transition. But that is how it is and that is how it always have been for all professions. Some disappears and new ones arises. In 30 year no one might be able to make a living on selling physical media, but then again, 30 years ago virtually no one made any money developing software. <a href=http://www.citazioni-celebri.com/frases-celebres/>frases</a>