Forgot your password?
Privacy Piracy The Internet Your Rights Online

In France, Hadopi Reporting Begins, With (Only) 10,000 IP Addresses Per Day 376

Posted by timothy
from the man-vs-l'etat dept.
mykos writes with an excerpt from TorrentFreak that says the automated enforcement of France's three-strikes law known as Hadopi is now coming into effect: "The scope of the operation is mind boggling. The copyright holders will start relatively 'slowly' with 10,000 IP-addresses a day, but within weeks this number is expected to go up to 150,000 IP-addresses per day according to official reports. The Internet providers will be tasked with identifying the alleged infringers' names, addresses, emails and phone numbers. If they fail to do so within 8 days they risk a fine of 1,500 euros per day for every unidentified IP-address. To put this into perspective, a United States judge ruled recently that the ISP Time Warner only has to give up 28 IP-addresses a month (1 per day) to copyright holders because of the immense workload the identifications would cause."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

In France, Hadopi Reporting Begins, With (Only) 10,000 IP Addresses Per Day

Comments Filter:
  • by Xest (935314) on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:33AM (#33685668)

    They'll just target IPs or hostnames assigned to French ISPs and ditch foreign IPs, that's really all they need to do to solve that problem.

  • Re:That's Everyone (Score:5, Informative)

    by pehrs (690959) on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:44AM (#33685778)

    Okay, I will bite.

    Kalle is 00:23:6c:8a:75:26
    Oscar is 00:21:b7:24:52:18

    Sep 22 17:04:08 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPREQUEST for from 00:23:6c:8a:75:26 via re0
    Sep 22 17:04:09 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPACK on to 00:23:6c:8a:75:26 via re0
    Sep 22 22:29:37 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPRELEASE of from 00:23:6c:8a:75:26 via re0 (found)
    Sep 22 22:29:37 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPRELEASE of from 00:23:6c:8a:75:26 via re0 (found)
    Sep 22 22:29:37 husky dhcpd[2673]: Released lease for IP address
    Sep 22 22:30:18 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:21:b7:24:52:18 via re0
    Sep 22 22:30:18 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPOFFER on to 00:21:b7:24:52:18 via re0
    Sep 22 22:30:20 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPREQUEST for from 00:21:b7:24:52:18 via re0
    Sep 22 22:30:20 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPACK on to 00:21:b7:24:52:18 via re0
    Sep 22 22:34:37 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPRELEASE of from 00:21:b7:24:52:18 via re0 (found)
    Sep 22 22:34:37 husky dhcpd[2673]: DHCPRELEASE of from 00:21:b7:24:52:18 via re0 (found)
    Sep 22 22:34:37 husky dhcpd[2673]: Released lease for IP address

    Given this data, please tell me which user had at Sep 22 22:30...

    Finding out how the switching fabric in a large network is configured at a point in time is a non-trivial problem. To this you should add that you don't know the precision of clocks involved, nor do you know if one of your users suddenly changed their MAC address. Possible you can log MAC address-port allocation, but even this is a very crude tool, as you have to match this logging information against your DHCP logs and then make sure that nobody was cheating the system by hard configuring an IP so it wasn't handed out by DHCP (remember: dumb switches are common in the last mile!)

    I don't envy anybody having to build such a system that can stand up to any scrutiny.

  • Re:Carte blanche (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:47AM (#33685798)

    In order to fix this, or at least slow it down, the copyright holders should have to pay a fixed amount per IP to offset the cost of the request for the ISP. Let's see them request 150,000 IPs per day when it cost 100 Euros per IP.

    That's what some of the ISP are asking for, that the government or the copyright holders compensate them for the cost of the identifications. They only got back a big fat "no way" so far. So, currently, ISP have to comply under 8 days, at their own cost, or pay a fine.

    Likely the whole system will soon be automated

    Yeah, well, no. The law is so well conceived that it does not specify under which form the ISP have to provide the copyright infringers identification details. So one of them, in a playful manner, sent the first batch of identification details through the mail, on some printed sheets of paper. Good luck to try automating that. :)

  • Re:A trivial problem (Score:3, Informative)

    by Dan Dankleton (1898312) on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:48AM (#33685802)

    For ADSL and similar services, cutting people off is generally* done by account name on the authentication server rather than IP address. Customers' IP addresses can change on a regular basis; their account name never does. Otherwise access is disabled by disabling the port which the customer connects to. It would be quite rare to disable access by blocking their IP.

    * For "generally" read "always"

  • by AwaxSlashdot (600672) on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:48AM (#33685804) Homepage Journal

    They provide the IP to an intermediary state run service (named HADOPI). This service requests the ID and send the warnings and ask to close the connection at the 3rd occurence.

    So media cartel don't get the final user iD.

  • ISPs will love this (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ogive17 (691899) on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:52AM (#33685830)
    ISPs will enjoy their sales dropping by 30% after a year due to this law and people getting their internet disconnected. Not only that, they have to provide the information that will result in the lost sales.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:53AM (#33685856)

    "Free" (name of a french ISP) is sending the informations via paper mail, one sheet per request, to slow down the whole process.

  • Re:Perspective (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ecuador (740021) on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:56AM (#33685912) Homepage

    Liberté, égalité, fraternité and all that bullshit are far behind them now.

    You are overreacting, it's still there...

    liberté - Copyright holders are free to get the IP's of everyone.
    égalité - Notice "everyone" from above. Soon the entire citizen base of France will be equally harassed by copyright holders.
    fraternité - Well, I am sure there will be more chance for the millions of harassed citizens to come together and share their woes in a brotherly fashion.

  • Re:Dear companies, (Score:3, Informative)

    by takev (214836) on Friday September 24, 2010 @08:57AM (#33685920)
    Please don't forget to pay for the right to entertain your family with your music, it is very likely (actually mathematically certain) that you infringe on part (one beat of musical passage is enough these days) of a copyrighted song.
  • Re:Carte blanche (Score:4, Informative)

    by AHuxley (892839) on Friday September 24, 2010 @09:05AM (#33686000) Homepage Journal
    "Likely the whole system will soon be automated."
    Australia is dreaming of that too. Show ID to get an ISP account, a fed or state task force clicks on any Australian ip and the data links back in real time.
    ".... the AFP [Australian Federal Police] told the briefing that it wanted to automate the process of requesting and obtaining access to telecommunications data." []
    France may want the same instant system. [] in the courts :)
  • Re:Carte blanche (Score:5, Informative)

    by AwaxSlashdot (600672) on Friday September 24, 2010 @09:09AM (#33686054) Homepage Journal

    So basically copyright holders in France have free reign to find out who any IP address belonged to.

    Technically, copyright holders don't know who the IP belongs to. They provide a list of IP to HADOPI, a state run service. HADOPI request the IDs and execute the 3 strikes process (e-mail, snail-mail, disconnection).

    With such volumes of request, there's no way their validity will be questioned in any way.

    Everything have been crafted that way. There are application notes from the gov discouraging the justice to run additional investigation and proceed to the disconnection solely from the "proofs" provided by copyright holders.

    Likely the whole system will soon be automated.

    Currently, there is one little glitch : the connection between ISP and HADOPI has not been formally defined. Gov does not want to draft it because the ISP will have the right to define the fees they'll ask to process this id request.

    So one ISP sent back the identification printed on paper since the format the id should be sent is not specifically defined.

  • Not 10K a day yet (Score:2, Informative)

    by bdunogier (1703556) on Friday September 24, 2010 @09:38AM (#33686358)
    This article deserves some more details.

    TMG, the company tracking P2P downloaders, has so far requested the identification of 800 IP addresses, not 10K yet. You should be amused to know that one of our ISPs has sent the names by fax on a piece of paper, since they have no obligation to send an electronic version.

    On a global scale, things aren't as bright as the government says. What is actually condemned by HADOPI isn't downloading copyrighted material; the process they were looking wasn't accepted with such an approach. Instead, they will condemn the lack of security on people's internet connections. Of course, no proper way to secure your internet access exists yet, but a call for offer has been published month ago, asking for software projects. These security apps will basically monitor "illegal" downloads, and keep them in a secure logfile the user shouldn't be able to temper with. We are still waiting.

    About the identification process cost, it has been decided that nobody would pay for it. Except us customers of course. The cost for such an ID is evaluated to 7 to 10 euros.

    This whole thing basically is a very, very big mess, and most of us think that this can't really work, and that the ultimate goal is to implement DPI at ISP level in order to completely block illegal downloads.
  • Re:Carte blanche (Score:4, Informative)

    by Krneki (1192201) on Friday September 24, 2010 @09:39AM (#33686366)
    Hey hey, slow down Johnny boy.
    This is not how democracy works. The big corporations, using corrupted politicians, create new laws that will never ever benefit the working class. Now in return the working class has to pay through taxes or higher internet fees all the new expenses that comes with this new type of regulation.

    And while the ISP is working his ass of to respect the new laws, a couple more legislation comes in order to track more user activities online, after all they are already monitoring what we are doing and if we didn't give a fuck the first time, why should we care later?

    P.S: Have a nice day.
  • by kangsterizer (1698322) on Friday September 24, 2010 @09:46AM (#33686454)

    When you get disconnected you are required to keep on paying the bill.

  • Re:Carte blanche (Score:3, Informative)

    by psycho12345 (1134609) on Friday September 24, 2010 @10:46AM (#33687244)
    First you have to pay someone to divert from their usual tasks to do this, or given the volume, you would need to hire a brand new person to do the lookups, possible more. 2nd the manager or some person delegated by said manager would have to sign off on them, as well as have the legal dept. sign as well. Even if its a total rubber stamp, it will still take people's time, which equals money.
  • Re:Carte blanche (Score:3, Informative)

    by CurseOfTheVampire (1221006) on Friday September 24, 2010 @11:13AM (#33687660)
    Also, for a bit more detail (from the same site):

    In English speaking countries, we use the common law as the basis of our legal system. In its origins, the Norman French occupied England, which was largely unsettled and not at all well policed. So it became relatively easy to have someone charged with a crime, since witnesses were rare. Juries were used to decide guilt and the facts of the case because the Normans did not speak the vernacular very well. Over time, the burden of proof was placed upon the accuser, later the Crown. It has been that way in our system for nearly a eight hundred years.

    The origins of law in France, Italy, Spain and a few other places, they follow what is called "civil law," which also includes criminal law. The historical antecedents of that system are the Code Justinian, church law, the customary law of the place, and the Code Napoleon, which was a re-codification of existing law.

    Under that system, it is the duty of the state to investigate crimes and to only bring charges if there is sufficient evidence to justify them. If accused, the defendant has the duty to try to show the state where it is was wrong in its investigation.

  • by Eunuchswear (210685) on Friday September 24, 2010 @11:15AM (#33687684) Journal

    Yes, the laws are extremely strict here:

    Current state of the law

    The use of cryptography is free, according to article 30(I) of the law No. 2004-575 of 21 June 2004 for the trust in the digital economy (Loi pour la confiance dans l'économie numérique).

    Source []

  • by Antity-H (535635) on Friday September 24, 2010 @11:16AM (#33687716) Homepage

    The current french president he tends to fire or harass people who don't agree with him. Add that he is a good friend of Martin Bouygues, his wife is a wannabe singer/actress/whatever and has connections all over the show biz having slept with half of them shake it and see what comes out :

    - Ending of the most valuable publicity timeshare on public TV, TF1 stock rises 10% (Bouygue owns TF1)
    - Hadopi paid with tax money earnings go to the copyright gangsters (includes Bouygues)
    - Increase of the copyright tax on digital media (add €200 for 3TBytes yep you read that right anyone who lawfully buys a hard drive in France pays a tax to
    copyright holders just in case that hard drive were used to store illegally obtained copyrighted materials)
    - ...

    There is a reason why he is called the "bling-bling" president.

    And since he is also a paranoid maniac France now considers a law so the police has the right to read all your electronic correspondence (protect the children against pedophiles) without having to ask a court (snail mail and telephone are supposedly protected).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 24, 2010 @12:23PM (#33688572)

    In random order:

    -In fact, it's not the illegal download that is punished, but the lack of security of the connection (thus creating an obligation of result in web security), as a workaround to the fact that the IP doesn't prove that the owner of the connection is guilty
    source: []]

    -The procedure will be the same as the one for driving misbehavior (radar, fee, etc.), ie for stuff 'that are simple and evident, thus shouldn't need a trial'
    source : []

    -If you want to contest : there are no action class in France

    -Later on, the gov may do DPI (Deep packet Inspection)
    source : []

    -Around 10,000 titles will be watched, and is should be half old, classic (= Michael Jackson, etc.), half recent files

  • Re:Carte blanche (Score:3, Informative)

    by St.Creed (853824) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:21PM (#33690918)

    You think Robespierre had a good personality? He became a tyrant himself, killing people simply because he didn't like their ideas.

    Which is exactly why Robespierre is such an excellent candidate for our liason to the RIAA.

  • Don't hurt me! (Score:4, Informative)

    by amoeba1911 (978485) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:26PM (#33690960) Homepage

    In fact, we're ALL copyright holders. Anytime you draw anything you own the copyright to it. Anytime you take a photo you own the copyright. Anytime your kid draws a crayon drawing, that's more copyrighted work... you should be proud of the fact that your kid will own the exclusive rights to that crayon drawing for 75 years after he's dead. Awesome, isn't it? Anytime you whistle yourself a tune, you own the copyright to that musical performance. If it's an original tune, then you own the copyright to the musical score. Anytime you speak, you own the copyrights to the sound you produced, as well as the words you sequenced together. Anytime you write something on slashdot, you own the copyright to it too.

    This however is at best a blatant and outrageous over-generalization, could be considered an offensive omission:

    Copyright holders are currently in the process of sending out tens of thousands of IP-addresses of alleged infringers to Internet service providers

    No, I'm not sending any IP addresses. You're not sending any IP addresses. Who are these people labeled as "copyright holders"? I know who they are, that's the "copyright mafia".

    Please, properly label these a-holes who want to protect their lavish lifestyles at the expense of us all. Saying that they are copyright holders is over generalization. All humans are copyright holders. These people the article is referring to are the COPYRIGHT MAFIA. They switched their Tommy guns for lawyers; instead of protection money they collect "distribution fees" for doing something that we could do easier without them. Instead of setting example by breaking your knee caps, they set example by suing you into oblivion. They have gotten accustomed to their lavish lifestyles at the expense of everyone around them. This is a mafia operation, not innocent "copyright holders".

"Life is a garment we continuously alter, but which never seems to fit." -- David McCord