Don't disagree with this but there's still the problem that actively monitoring data is illegal. This doesn't repeal the provisions in the ECT act so how are ISPs going to realistically become aware? The only scenario I see is where a court order is already obtained or where a third party brings it to their attention. Both cases it should be redundant to report it again.
ECT Act says ISPs are under no obligation to monitor. RICA says prohibited for intercepting and monitoring. I agree re the redundancy of reporting (although this is not always the case) but as someone who works at the interface between law enforcement and ISPs i can live with the obligation
interestingly "piracy" is one area where ISPs receive notifications alerting to them to alleged unlawful conduct from copyrightholders - (leaving aside that these are received from US companies under US law) would this constitute sufficient notice to make the ISP aware? And to be clear i think the argument being raised in this article is BS.....
May be the case but I don't see how it would be workable or enforceable. Seems to me like it's the equivalent of polishing a turd. May look nice at first but when you start to handle it it still reveals itself as a turd.
it is required and it is mostly sound - implementation of many aspects will be problematic but that's how it goes