Sebastian Freundt wrote:
I was claiming that. You haven't seen actual infringement notices, it heavily depends on how technophile the issuing court is, there are cases where they have to hand out all customers connected at a certain time in a /24 AS owned by the ISP because according to German (and Swedish?) law the ISP is (partially) liable too. If they can however name one party they can proceed against them in a civil case demanding compensation.
I can very well imagine incompetent prosecutors who demand all connections in a /32 at a given time or time span (because the ISP is treated like a suspect too) I SOOOO would love to hand over 20000 sheets of paper:)
With IPv4 and NAT, there is no connection between IP address and hardware behind the NAT. With IPv6 and random addresses, the same applies. With MAC addresses, then each computer could be tracked, which, incidentally, is the reason the random address method was developed.
Yep, making it the end hard to trace, but that's EXACTLY what an ISP needs to do (in certain countries).
That law is incompetent. It leaves many people in the position of having to prove their innocence. There's no difference between this and rounding up everyone on a busy street, because *ONE* of them committed a crime. There are plenty of examples of laws passed by people who do not understand the implications. Regardless, there's no difference between computers hiding behind NAT and computers using random addresses in this respect. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org