Slashdot Mirror
Tufts Tells Judge, We Can't Tie IP To MAC Addresses
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Protesting that Tufts University's DHCP-based systems 'were not designed to facilitate forensic examinations,' but rather to ensure 'smooth operations and to manage capacity issues,' the IT Office at Tufts University has responded to the subpoena in an RIAA case, Zomba v. Does 1-11, by submitting a report to the judge (PDF) explaining why it cannot cross-match IP addresses and MAC addresses, or identify users accurately. The IT office explained that the system identifies machines, not users; that some MAC addresses have multiple users; that only the Address Resolution Protocol system has even the potential to match IP addresses with MAC addresses, but that system could not do so accurately. For reasons which are unclear, the IT department then suggested that the RIAA next time send them 'notices to preserve information,' in response to which they would preserve, rather than overwrite, the DHCP data, for the RIAA's forensic benefit."
I'm sure the ICT department were real sorry they couldnt facilitate RIAA's demands.
My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
How long until it makes law?
We were recently required to explicitly keep something like 6 months worth of call data records (although we keep many years worth already due to customer requirements) so that wasn't such an issue.
However, if ISPs (and universities or other large organisations) were suddenly required to keep track of all IP allocations for 6 months or more it'd cost a bucket load to implement.
Remember kids: Just because an IP address doesn't necessarily identify a person doesn't mean that copyright infringement is OK.
People should understand that MAC address is no more permanent than IP address is.
Unfortunately they don't.
-- Reality checks don't bounce.
Nice move on Tufts' part. If they ever do receive such a "notice to preserve", they can relay it straight back to their students and staff and say "look, the RIAA is watching us with a view to screwing you, so behave yourselves" for the duration of such a notice; and if they don't, they have effectively insulated their charges from all further RIAA action. And all whilst looking extermely co-operative for the benefit of the courts...
You mean judges who know meaningless jargon when they hear it, and want all terms of reference used in their courtroom to be clearly defined.
What, exactly, legally speaking, is a 'website'? Where does one 'website' end and another begin? How does a 'site' differ from a 'page', if at all? Is a 'forum' part of a 'website', or only attached to it? Is there, as the media often says, a 'file sharing website' called 'BitTorrent' on which pirates trade music? What exactly is this 'Web' thing anyway, and how is it distinct from the 'Internet', if at all?
A lot of terms bandied about in common parlance regarding Internet services are very vague, and I'm glad to hear of judges demanding that they be defined clearly and unambiguously when in court.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
For reasons which are unclear, the IT department then suggested that the RIAA next time send them 'notices to preserve information,' in response to which they would preserve, rather than overwrite, the DHCP data, for the RIAA's forensic benefit."
I honestly wish Tufts hadn't even suggested this to the RIAA, since we all know this will be the next thing they'll try and have legislated through Congress. One of the congressmen on the RIAA payroll will attempt to slip it into a bill undetected.
They won't limit it to colleges either - they'll probably make it a requirement of ISPs in general.
For reasons which are unclear, the IT department then suggested that the RIAA next time send them 'notices to preserve information,' in response to which they would preserve, rather than overwrite, the DHCP data, for the RIAA's forensic benefit.
Why? The RIAA is not a court of law or even a government agency. Surely the university would have no obligation to comply with its requests? Talking about the RIAA in these terms ("notices", "forensic") lends it unwarranted legitimacy and authority.
That's not Picasso, that's Kandinsky!
Right, aim high!
Red Leader Standing By!
Next hot network thing: RIAA approved DHCP ;)
Scary, isn't it?
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Yes but the proof RIAA would bring to the court is not just the IP/MAC address combination. That's just a pretext to grab a random student who's IP happens to match, seize his computer and find thousands of MP3 files in the shared folders of a P2P application. That would then constitute the actual evidence they need.
And, of course, nobody has *ever* spoofed a MAC Address ....
Invaders must die
True, but I bet that most CIS and IS students know that you CAN do it. Then it becomes a simple matter of googling. The key here is that anyone who has taken a bAIX networking course has enough knowledge to dispute evidence crucial to the RIAA's case. The fact the RIAA is able to continually present this evidence in a court room tells me that
1. Judges and juries do not know enough about the technology that they are ruling on.
2. The RIAA's experts are deliberately misleading the judges and juries. This is not ethical and should have consequence.
It's not like every student would have to be going around spoofing MAC addresses. You could have ten kids going around sniffing MAC addresses, then spoofing a different MAC every day to do their file sharing. You could certainly be vulnerable to this without knowing how it works.
Spot on. The lack of clue within the RIAA is mindnumbing.
I suspect the RIAA knows EXACTLY what the technical facts are. But if they can still sue w/o having those get in their way, so much the better! (For them)
Remember this is law, not logic.
Before you design for reuse, make sure to design it for use.