Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy The Internet IT

Lycos Germany to No Longer Store IP Data 237

Posted by Zonk from the keeping-big-brother-out dept.
quaker5567 writes "The Register is carrying the story that Lycos Germany says it will no longer store dynamic IP addresses of its customers. According to the German Tele Services Data Protection and Telecommunications Act, ISPs are only allowed to store communications data for accounting purposes. Apparently, there is no requirement for German ISPs to keep a record of IP addresses. A decision by German ISPs not to keep logs on IP addresses would be extremely controversial as the entertainment industry is increasingly demanding that ISPs disclose the names of suspected file sharers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lycos Germany to No Longer Store IP Data More

Lycos Germany to No Longer Store IP Data

Comments Filter:

  • Options (Score:5, Interesting)

    by panxerox ( 575545 ) * on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:27PM (#12596262)
    This has always been an option for ISPs. I can see keeping IP info for a week or so in case there was an incursion but after that the only thing that it could be used for is informing (whether it was coerced or otherwise) on your customers ! As customers we must demand that our ISPs no keep long term IP records. There are plenty of options to connect to the internet and we as consumers must tell our ISPs that we will make this an important part of our bandwidth purchasing decision.

    • Re:Options (Score:3, Insightful)

      by geekee ( 591277 )
      "As customers we must demand that our ISPs no keep long term IP records. There are plenty of options to connect to the internet and we as consumers must tell our ISPs that we will make this an important part of our bandwidth purchasing decision."

      So what's your opinion of Morgan Stanley being fined over 1 billion for not keeping email around? It seems like the same sort of case, yet the sentiment there was they were probably guilty, so it was ok. With copyright infringement, the sentiment is, the users are
      • Because an ISP is a multibillion dollar financial corporation.

        OH WAIT!

        And nobody is "probably guilty," we're all innocent until proven otherwise.

      • Re:Options (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Gregg Alan ( 8487 ) * on Friday May 20, 2005 @11:15PM (#12596482)
        So what's your opinion of Morgan Stanley being fined over 1 billion for not keeping email around? It seems like the same sort of case, yet the sentiment there was they were probably guilty, so it was ok. With copyright infringement, the sentiment is, the users are probably guilty, but they should be protected anyway.

        That's a great point. IMO, the fine is wrong. Here's why: Assuming Morgan Stanley IS guilty of whatever the hell they are accused of doing, keeping records to prove your own guilt is nearly a violation of the 5th amendment. Or, at least, preventing such self-incriminating evidence to come to light could be considered exercising ones right to plead the fifth.

        On the other hand, Morgan Stanley is not a person so these rights do not (should not) exist for them so fuck 'em.

        In conclusion, my opinion is that ISPs should be required to destroy that data as soon as it's only purpose is to inform against their own customers. I think that because I constantly see advertisements for high speed internet access telling me that I can download music and movies faster that freaking ever. It's almost as if these ISPs are enticing me to download movies and music that I would otherwise not download because I would not have able to because my internet connection would not allow it to be possible. That's close enough to entrapment for me to *form my opinion*.

        So, that is my opinion.

        • Re:Options (Score:3, Informative)

          by rawb ( 529039 )
          Morgan Stanley *IS* guilty because email now qualifies as memo's did in the past. All paperwork within a corporation must be kept for records and potential audits by the SEC.

          There is no such rule regarding the internet and it's users' IP addresses... at least not yet.

        • Re:Options (Score:4, Insightful)

          by tha_mink ( 518151 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @12:08AM (#12596727)
          " In conclusion, my opinion is that ISPs should be required to destroy that data as soon as it's only purpose is to inform against their own customers."

          In principal, I agree with you. However, as a server admin trying to fight off attacks from the Russians, Koreans and Chinese script kiddies, I disagree.

          It's a fool that believes that the internet is like air, in that once you speak something it should evaporate into the air as vibration. A fool. It's not the record companies you should be worried about, it's the script kiddies and the real crack-ers. If you only knew what they do, you would want a way to track them.

          I know that the people, not unlike yourself, who use the internet for downloading "Star Wars" think that everything should be anonymous and so forth but, truth be told, there are other uses for bandwidth. Like making money. If you can't track people posthumous, you're dead. It's the last line of defense between you and a would-be cracker. The only thing stopping most people who COULD crack-n-hack is the fact that they know they can be found out.

          It would be like you being able to walk around, completely invisible. The thing stopping you from robbing a bank is the cameras right? (oh wait...you've probably got morals)

          Of course, I guess you could log IPs from the other side but...but...but...
          • the thin blue line hero shit doesn't work for me. log ip's connecting to your services, not from your customers.

          • Re:Options (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Gregg Alan ( 8487 ) * on Saturday May 21, 2005 @12:24AM (#12596788)
            I know that the people, not unlike yourself, who use the internet for downloading "Star Wars"

            You're wrong on that point, but I certainly can't fault you for that assumption considering where we are.

            Of course, I guess you could log IPs from the other side but...but...but...

            Hmm... well, this would help you if all you needed/wanted to do was try to stop the next attack. It's useless (as you are well aware) if the ISP that owns that particular IP has no idea who used it. It's also useless in preventing the next attack if it is a dynamic IP unless you are willing to block more than /32s.

            I empathize with the desire to make the internet a safer place. I really do.

            But tracking everyone's actions on the internet does not make the world a better place. It has the potential to make *your* job/bottom line/whatever better and that's not something I care about. (Nothing personal)
        • Or, at least, preventing such self-incriminating evidence to come to light could be considered exercising ones right to plead the fifth.

          Of course, depending on *when* you do it, it could also be considered at attempt to pervert the course of justice and/or destruction of evidence.

        • Or, at least, preventing such self-incriminating evidence to come to light could be considered exercising ones right to plead the fifth.

          I am neither a lawyer nor an American but I see it this way (and suspect the US courts do too, it's the whole basis for discovery in a trial). The relevant clause from the fifth amendment is, "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself". Any document you wrote and which the court requires you to provide is technically the witness, not

      • Re:Options (Score:5, Insightful)

        by eric76 ( 679787 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @11:27PM (#12596540)
        So what's your opinion of Morgan Stanley being fined over 1 billion for not keeping email around? It seems like the same sort of case,

        Nonsense. There is nothing at all similar about the two.

        Morgan Stanley was trashing e-mails, likely so that they could not be used against them in court, at least to some extent. It might be argued that if it weren't for the possibility that they could be used against them, it would be something that might be valuable for them to keep.

        There is nothing valuable about the IP data for the ISP after some reasonable period of time. It has a very short shelf life. Neither is there anything in it to use against the ISP. There is no reason to keep it longer than necessary. Any ISP who was concerned about the privacy of their customers would dump it once it was clear they had no need of it.

        My ISP doesn't keep the information long term. There is no intention to create problems for anyone. It's just that once the data is no longer necessary, it is dumped.

      • Re:Options (Score:2, Informative)

        by skarphace ( 812333 )
        Not a good point. Working for a financial services company, I know it is required for them to keep their email around. Research the Sarbanes-Oxley act. That is law. Keeping IP addressis logged is not.

      • Re:Options (Score:3, Informative)

        by timmarhy ( 659436 )
        ip logging and the S&M case are a completely diffferent context. S&M were in the middle of a court case and these emails suddenly disappeared. logging ip's is assuming all your customers are breaking the law. i know i'm not going to stand for my isp treating me like a criminal.

    • Re:Options (Score:3, Insightful)

      by BeBoxer ( 14448 )
      As customers we must demand that our ISPs no keep long term IP records.

      If you do this, you have to promise not to complain when their DHCP server starts churning out new IP addresses to you ever day or so, screwing the folks who use dynamic DNS to run servers. Just something to keep in mind. Some people do get benefit out of static addresses.

      • Then resolve... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by msimm ( 580077 )
        If you're smart enough to run a server your certainly smart enough to A) pay for a static address B) set up dynamic redirection [www.dyns.cx].

        Aside from the fact that this would never happen in the US you've brought up essentially a stupid, non-point.
      • I don't think that the internal database showing who currently has an IP leased would count as IP records.

        But if it were, I think the RIAA, the MPAA, or anyone other such organization would want the user's name and address, not the MAC address of the network card on the user's computer.

  • In other news... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Kinky Bass Junk ( 880011 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:27PM (#12596263)
    ... crackers have obsessively moved to Germany, and signed up for accounts with dynamic IP addresses.

  • Just to play devil's advocate.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ninwa ( 583633 ) <jbleau@gmail.com> on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:27PM (#12596265) Homepage Journal
    What happens when somebody does something more serious than steal music, are they just going to look the law enforcement trying to get information and shrug? I hope this does not mean that people will feel even more anonymous and get the gull to do things they wouldnt've otherwise.
    • Any person with less-than honorable intentions won't do so from the comforts of their own home.

      They're going to haul their laptop, equiped with Wi-Fi, to some random unsecured access point on the far side of town and do it there. In a situation like that, logs are almost entirely useless.

      • Re:Just to play devil's advocate.... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ergo98 ( 9391 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @11:20PM (#12596515) Homepage Journal
        Any person with less-than honorable intentions won't do so from the comforts of their own home.

        They're going to haul their laptop, equiped with Wi-Fi, to some random unsecured access point on the far side of town and do it there. In a situation like that, logs are almost entirely useless.

        And here it is. Of course this explanation would appear, despite the fact that if this was the case then this story wouldn't be an issue at all. All of the file sharers could just grab their laptops and head to a wifi location.

        Of course we know that is nonsense - criminals generally are dumb, and the police endlessly bust child-porn rings, as well as find people who communicate with children through IM services, via trusty IP logs and warrants. Even outside of this, though, forcing a criminal to go to a specific wifi point, itself easily identifiable, is vastly more of a lead to go on than "somebody in the state of New York". If you know that somebody sent a serious death threat from Joe's Coffee Shop at 2 in the afternoon, you can connect the dots and build some evidence.
    • I bet you're a fan of Radio Shack's practice of requiring a name and address to make a sale.

      One Radio Shack salesmoron tried to justify that to me by claiming that if the merchandise is used illegally, it makes it easier for the police to track you down.

      One time I bought a battery for a bicycle spedometer at a Radio Shack and when they asked for my name, I told the salesmoron that they didn't need it. As I was walking to my car, I glanced down at the sales slip and did a quick u-turn to go back inside.

      I
    • >What happens when somebody does something more
      >serious than steal music, are they just going to
      >look the law enforcement trying to get
      >information and shrug?

      Don't know, what do the post office do when the police calls and wants to know what was written in letters they delivered, they need it for this murder case?

  • 2 Sides to Every Coin (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anti-Trend ( 857000 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:30PM (#12596286) Homepage Journal
    What about data pertaining to spam and hack attempts? Wouldn't IP data be crucial for those purposes in addition to file sharing? Now don't get me wrong, I have zero respect for the RIAA/MPAA. But I'd have a great deal more admiration if they had simply put their collective foot down about the file-sharing privacy issue and left it at that.
    • If someone hasn't complained about a spammer or a break-in attempt within four or five days, it is very unlikely that they are going to complain at all.

      In most cases, I bet one to two days retention would be more than sufficient.

  • I for one... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PyWiz ( 865118 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:31PM (#12596291)
    ...think this is a good move on the part of ISPs to quit doing the government's dirty work for tracking down criminals. It's not a company's job to keep tabs on their customers for the sole purpose of turning them over to law enforcement.

    On the minus side, it is very likely some kind of political backlash will occur and a law will be passed requiring ISPs to keep much more detailed records than they do even now...
    • How is "dirty work" for a provider of a service (and the only people who actually do know to whom they've assigned an IP address) to be the ones who keep track of this stuff? How is it any different than the trail that your cell phone leaves? That's all subject to court requests.
    • ...think this is a good move on the part of ISPs to quit doing the government's dirty work for tracking down criminals.

      The downside is that such ISPs will have no ways to identify customers with infected Windows machines, disconnect them (or put them into some kind of "walled garden"), and tell the customers to clean up their PCs.

  • Sad state of affairs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by philovivero ( 321158 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:34PM (#12596307) Homepage Journal
    From the article:

    A decision by German ISPs not to keep logs on IP addresses would be extremely controversial as the entertainment industry is increasingly demanding that ISPs disclose the names of suspected file sharers.
    It is quite a sad state of affairs when a company does something that is popular with the people, and yet there is controversy because another company doesn't want it to be done.

    This is the most artificial sense of the word "controversy," because it is completely artificial.

    Sad, sad state of affairs.

  • Entertainment? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mensa Babe ( 675349 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:36PM (#12596315) Homepage Journal
    "A decision by German ISPs not to keep logs on IP addresses would be extremely controversial as the entertainment industry is increasingly demanding that ISPs disclose the names of suspected file sharers."

    Entertainment industry be damned. What we should worry about is network and systems security, DDoS, botnets, zombies, and of course SPAM and PORN. I hope we will not have to block *.de on our SMTP relays and TCP/IP firewalls like we had with *.cn and *.ne. Hopefully Germans will know how to be responsible with their privacy and lack of control. Only time will tell.

    • I hope we will not have to block *.de on our SMTP relays and TCP/IP firewalls like we had with *.cn and *.ne.

      You probably mean the RIPE address blocks assigned to Germany. All german ISPs offer .com/.net/.org and all other global TLDs as well to their customers.

  • Potential to become a hotspot (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sv-Manowar ( 772313 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:36PM (#12596318) Homepage Journal

    If this IP block is known to be safe from identification, its certainly possible that crackers could choose to scan the area more heavily for exploits and rootable machines, making the block a source for malicious traffic.

    On the other hand, it should make quite a selling point for tech-savvy customers in the area when in comparison with other ISP's. This may be effective protection against copyright lawsuits, providing enough obscurity that the regional enforcement agency choose not to pursue cases.

    It should be interesting to see if this trend continues to other ISP's, and what effects occur as a result of this change

  • Law Enforcement? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by guyfromindia ( 812078 )
    While everybody is obsessed about 'music' and 'file sharing', its time to think about what effect this will have on law enforcement... E.g. how will the police trace a criminal without the precious info?

  • Privacy and copyright in German law (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Peter Eckersley ( 66542 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @10:47PM (#12596367) Homepage
    Unlike most other nations' legal systems, human dignity and therefore privacy is central to the German constitution (this was a result of its being drafted in the wake of second world war). It follows that German copyright law does not trump privacy concerns; this was one of the reasons why Germany invented the levy-funded private copying system [ipria.org].

    • Re:Privacy and copyright in German law (Score:5, Insightful)

      by henni16 ( 586412 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @01:17AM (#12597049)
      Well that _was_ once true.
      People like Gestapo-minister Otto Schily and his lackey Brigitte Zypries as minister of justice
      don't give a flying f... about the constitiuon and everybody applauds.
      Besides from DMCA-like plans to give "Copyright holders" the right to request customer data from ISPs,
      they are pushing laws to require ISPs to not only store IPs but also all communication data including visited URLs. email header info, IM data, SMSes, telephone connection data and much more stuff.
      The only thing they aren't sure about is how many years ISPs and telcos will be required to store all that information and who pays for it.

      Btw. they are also pushing to build nationwide DNA- and fingerprint databases.

      The East-German STASI and the Gestapo would have had wet dreams about the infrastructure that is going to be created.
      I think it isn't necessary to point out that all this is done "to fight islamistic terrorism"
      and to "protect our freedom".
      Apropos: because of their severeness the anti-terror laws passed after 9/11 were limited in time and to be reevaluated after five years.
      Since they were such a success (not proven), now minster Schiliy and others suggest to keep them forever without a mandatory reevaluation and even extend their scope/power.


      Do I even have to conclude this rant by saying that I am much more worried about
      the actions of our politicans than about terrorist attacks?
      But hey, as long as you have nothing to hide..
      • Yep.

        And the worst thing is, Schily backs those antiterror laws about like that:

        Schily stands somewhere in the wood and repeatly hits a drum.
        The Germans ask: why are you doing this?
        Schily answers: to keep the elephants... err... terrorists away
        Germans: but there are no terrorists in Germany
        Schily: see, it's working!
      • You are partly right. Yet, writing from (and living) outside of Germany, I have to tell you that Germany is still a shining example for privacy, freedom of speech and other personal freedoms.

        Examples: When was the last time you have seen a public CCTV in a German street or public place? In London (where I live) there is nearly no street left without one, and the Authorities now want to introduce microphones as well.
        Yesterday, we read [slashdot.org] about a Professor being fired for stating his opinions in public. In

        • When was the last time you have seen a public CCTV in a German street or public place?

          Hah! What about the toll collect system on the hiways? There are already plans to extend this to monitor ALL cars in addition to trucks; and not only for toll collecting purposes but also for the so called anti-terror laws.

          And what about all those surveilliance cams in the public transportation system (trains, stations, ...). Are they used just to thwart vandalism?

        • Re:Privacy and copyright in German law (Score:4, Interesting)

          by henni16 ( 586412 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @08:19AM (#12598236)
          When was the last time you have seen a public CCTV in a German street or public place
          That's right, they are not that common here, although the usual suspects every now and then talk about installing some more.

          Yesterday, we read about a Professor being fired for stating his opinions in public To get somewhat offtopic:
          Reading that I was upset like probably most people but thinking about it later, I really would like some more information about that case.
          There was an interesting comment on the professor's blog that he announced (probably to the university and even to the Spanish RIAA equivalent as he said he told them about the lecture) to download some copyrighted works and then explaining why that wasn't illegal.
          Now, if he was wrong about it being legal (who knows..) or it being doubtful, perhaps the university was threatened to be held liable for knowingly supportig copyright infringement.
          So maybe this was more a cover-your-ass-reaction from the university('s legal department) than censorship.
          Who knows (I don't understand Spanish) if they said something like: "Uh, well, go ahead talking , but you are not allowed to download Episode III using the university's network".
          Don't know if that happend, but in that case it wouln't surprise (and upset) me that much..

          As to the personal ID cards. I don't think the nationwide DNA databases you mention will be coming anytime soon
          I didn't mention the ID cards. I was more going in the direction of lowering the requirements for taking DNA samples of suspects,
          like dropping the need for an judge to approve this, widening the number of cases that allow taking DNA samples.
          I read an interview with minister Zypries where she herself had to admit after continuous inquiry that her proposed law changes
          would technically allow the taking and storing of DNA samples in cases like repeated shoplifting or even repeated riding-the-bus-withou-paying.
          Well, and the public support for all this after the murder of Mooshammer a few months ago..
          (To paraphrase comedian (is there something like "political cabaret artist" in English?) Matthias Richling:
          "With all those supporters for extending DNA-collection jumping out of the woodwork and the backing they get now,
          you could think that Mooshamer was murdered by a hired killer of the CSU" ;-)

          P.S. I also don't think that the Personlausweis (without RFID chip for fingerprints and DNA)is a bad idea; not sure about the legal requirement to have one, though.

          • There was an interesting comment on the professor's blog that he announced (probably to the university and even to the Spanish RIAA equivalent as he said he told them about the lecture) to download some copyrighted works and then explaining why that wasn't illegal.
            Now, if he was wrong about it being legal (who knows..) or it being doubtful, perhaps the university was threatened to be held liable for knowingly supporting copyright infringement.

            There are plenty of copyrighted materials that you can downlo

            • There are plenty of copyrighted materials that you can download and share

              Yes, I know,
              And because we aren't the only ones that know about that, I am guessing that he most likely didn't inform that Spanish RIAA-like group:
              "Hey, I'm going to download the latest Debian and show that it is legal. Eat this!" ;-)
              That wouldn't be much of an issue, more likely is something like:
              "Hey, I own $CD with $track from $artist and I am going to download $track from P2P in class and show that it is legal because of x,y

  • Meanwhile, spammers rejoice (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Otterley ( 29945 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @11:05PM (#12596432)
    This isn't just good news for unauthorized file sharers. It's also good news for spammers, who assuredly will race to use any ISP which does not log IP allocations. Untraceable senders are great both for direct spammers, who will benefit from their untouchability, as well as indirect spammers, who will benefit from having infected spam relays on the net for a much, much longer time.
    • Of course, the solution to this is to block port 25 entirely, or filter port 25 in some more creative way. ie. a 1 second cumulative delay for each mail recipient in the last ten minutes from this account/IP/port.
  • While it's nice to know that this will make it more difficult for the **AA to come knocking on your door, this removes one of the three big A's in security: auditing. If a machine with a dynamic IP address is engaging in malicious behavior, this makes it much more difficult for the ISP to identify the account associated with the behavior. This is a real problem if you want to disable machines that are compromised and are being used for spamming/DDOS/whatever. I hope that there are provisions for the ISP to keep the data for a short period of time and/or keep interesting data available for investigative purposes.

  • Oh, the irony... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by tamrood ( 821829 )
    That the birthplace of the Gestapo and the SS may well become one of the last remaining strongholds of personal liberty and privacy in the world.

    Oh, wait. They've seen this before, haven't they?

    -- Alice Uber Deutchland

  • This is complying with German law, FWIH (Score:5, Interesting)

    by WoodstockJeff ( 568111 ) on Friday May 20, 2005 @11:46PM (#12596638) Homepage
    There have been several German PHPBB users asking how to disable the storage of IPs with messages on their boards, because saving that information is a violation of German law. Personally, I think it is ridiculous, but they're very serious about it.

    These actions would just be extending that to the ISPs themselves. If they have no need for the data, it must be disposed of, or not collected in the first place.

    Of course, given that this means there is no accountability through the ISP for the actions of users, I know I won't be allowing random IPs from Germany to connect to my email servers!

    • Not storing information that can directly identify a person unless there is a well defined business need for it is the general rule in all EU/EEA countries, not something exceptional for Germany. The only thing that differs between the countries is how strictly it is being enforced.

      In other words I would not be surprised to see this extend in some form or other to ISP's in other parts of Europe as well.

  • Yeah, but what if... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 20, 2005 @11:54PM (#12596676)
    <flame>

    I can't believe all this crap I'm hearing about "what if somebody does something bad and the ip address isn't logged" shit.

    What fucking country did you grow up in where monitoring your every move IN CASE you MIGHT break a law was tolerated. When did we let our privacy and freedom get JACKED from us?

    Real IDs, IP monitoring, etc... This kind of shit was UNTHINKABLE here in the US before the 1980's, and now, because we believe everything we're told about bad things happening if we don't do it, we've given away all of our freedoms and tolerate monitoring and intrusion that was considered science fiction material 20 years ago.

    Other countries are NOT following our example- Spain didn't turn itself into a police state after the train bombings, politicians there went as far as to say "we are NOT at war", whereas, hear in the US, politicians say just the opposite, and we buy that shit!!!

    Land of the Free, my ass....

    </flame>

    • Re:Yeah, but what if... (Score:5, Funny)

      by tamrood ( 821829 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @12:35AM (#12596833)
      THIS IS THE CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER...

      Your lack of docility has been noted, along with your IP address. Please be advised that to continue to disagree with the State is an abomination in the sight of God, and is prohibited under the same law that requires approved identification for airplane travel.

      You are ill. For your safety and convenience, please take increased doses of the low-level neurotoxins we have been marketing as artificial sweeteners, right away.

      The Constitution is only an historical document, it is not relevant to your life. Ignore it. This is in the interest of National Security, Democracy and Freedom.

      Calm down. Have another diet cola. Watch Fox News.

      Sleeeep...

    • What fucking country did you grow up in where monitoring your every move IN CASE you MIGHT break a law was tolerated

      Logging of IP addresses won't prevent (or aid) monitoring. What it will do is assist in after-the-event investigation of an incident.

  • It will be almot as bad as the real world!!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ricardo ( 43461 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @12:05AM (#12596714)
    The other day I was able to walk down the street, go into a shop and buy some milk - get this - WITHOUT ONE PERSON ASKING ME TO IDENTIFY MYSELF!.
    Can you imagine all the possible marketing information I squandered selfishly by not informing a central database about this action (this report not included). The cash I used was totally UNTRACEABLE!!! it could have come from anywhere. Not only that, but the person behind the counter was happy to undertake the transaction without me identifying myself (obviously some kind of terrorist).
    I could have been going to use the milk for a BOMB!, would the authorities have had any way to check this? NO!!!!
    When did everything become like this?
    Oh wait - it has always been like this in Democracies.

  • Holger Voss (Score:3, Interesting)

    by slavemowgli ( 585321 ) on Saturday May 21, 2005 @06:26AM (#12597939) Homepage
    The article also mentions that another case (Holger Voss vs. Deutsche Telekom / T-Online) is currently being heard by a court; Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] has some more background information on Holger Voss and on another case which is probably related.

  • Apparently, there is no requirement for German ISPs to keep a record of IP addresses

    There is not only no requirement to keep the data, the ISPs (and everybody else) are prohibited to keep personal data (which includes anything that might identify an individual) unless immediately required for conducting their business or explicitely allowed by the customer. In other words, people are suing because the providers are not complying to German Datenschutz (data protection) laws.

  • How would it be controversial? (Score:4, Informative)

    by rfc1394 ( 155777 ) <Paul@paul-robinson.us> on Saturday May 21, 2005 @10:22AM (#12598693) Homepage Journal
    If you don't store information you can't be subpoenaed for it. And you can't compromise information you don't keep. People can't perform identity theft or harm your customers by stealing information from you if you don't keep the information in the first place. And the government can't turn you into an informant collecting information for them if you have no information to collect.

    How is it controversial to treat customers with respect by not recording information not absolutely necessary to provide service to them? When I go into Office Depot, I can buy supplies, pay cash and leave. They don't ask me my address, my religion or my political opinions; all they care about is that my money is the right color, as it should be. Other business should consider doing the same thing: If you don't need the information in order to provide the product or service, don't ask for it. If you don't need to retain the information once the product or service is provided, don't keep it.

    I have run my businesses that way for years; it saves a lot of paperwork hassles. Too many businesses see additional information collected from customers as a business asset they can sell. Which turns it into more data that can be prostituted into use for other purposes, not all of them good. Correction, most of them definitely bad.

Slashdot Top Deals

Work is the crab grass in the lawn of life. -- Schulz

Close