ISP: It’s Impossible For Us to Stop Illegal P2P

Want to help support this blog? Try out Oh Dear, the best all-in-one monitoring tool for your entire website, co-founded by me (the guy that wrote this blogpost). Start with a 10-day trial, no strings attached.

We offer uptime monitoring, SSL checks, broken links checking, performance & cronjob monitoring, branded status pages & so much more. Try us out today!

Profile image of Mattias Geniar

Mattias Geniar, September 23, 2008

Follow me on Twitter as @mattiasgeniar

TorrentFreak reports on the case of a Belgian ISP (Scarlet) vs The Copyright Group (SABAM).

An ISP which was ordered by a court to stop illegal file-sharing on its network, says it simply can not. The Belgian ISP Scarlet says the court’s verdict is unworkable and after trying to slow traffic and also filter it, it says it’s not possible to stop the flow of illicit files since Audible Magic doesn’t work.

It’s an interesting case to follow up on, because they seem to draw the line to “every ISP” being responsible for “any (illegal) activity” on its network.

In mid-2007, after a battle with copyright group SABAM, a court in Belgium ruled that Internet Service Providers can be forced to block and/or filter copyright infringing files on P2P networks. Although most people familiar with the technical hurdles recognized that this was a massive if not impossible task, the judge in the case ruled that ISPs are indeed capable of blocking infringing content and gave Scarlet six months to comply.

So what can you do? Block all P2P/BitTorrent traffic? Block legitimate traffic too?

The ISP quite rightly refused to block all P2P traffic, since it said it would be blocking legitimate traffic too. However, copyright group SABAM said this was not a valid excuse. “The argument put forward by Scarlet,” said SABAM’s lawyer, “is not about the impossibility of blocking, but about the consequences.” SABAM clearly doesn’t care who is affected, as long as it gets its way, stating that Scarlet simply hasn’t tried hard enough to comply with the court.

Perhaps use specific software, to track & filter illegal files?

The second solution, the filtering of illicit files, was a solution put forward last year by SABAM itself. On the advice of an appointed P2P ‘expert’, the court ruled that Scarlet must use the content filtering technology offered by Audible Magic. However, Scarlet tried this system and it didn’t work when scanning for files on their network. During last year’s court case it was claimed that Audible Magic had experience with filtering in the US with Verizon and in Asia with another ISP. However, Scarlet made inquiries with Verizon about the partnership but was told that no such deal exists and Audible Magic refused to reveal who the Asian ISP is.

So much for Audible Magic then …

What can one do about this? Who’s responsible in the end? If we draw this line further, it’s not Scarlet that should be blamed – but it’s international carriers who actually transfer all the data. Where’s the end? What happened to the end-user being responsible?

What if I send a postal package with an illegal version of a game to a friend. Is the mailman responsible, because he delivered it to the postal address? Or am I responsible, because I actually sent the package?

And should that mailman open my package, analyze its content and then destroy it? Even though I payed my stamp to get it delivered in the first place?

It’s the ISP that’s responsible, it’s the supplier of the illegal content – the end user. Face it, and live up to it.



Want to subscribe to the cron.weekly newsletter?

I write a weekly-ish newsletter on Linux, open source & webdevelopment called cron.weekly.

It features the latest news, guides & tutorials and new open source projects. You can sign up via email below.

No spam. Just some good, practical Linux & open source content.