
EU Court: Open WiFi Operator Not Liable for Pirate Users - chewymouse
https://torrentfreak.com/eu-court-open-wifi-operator-not-liable-for-pirate-users-160916/
======
zaroth
So you can offer free internet access at your business in order to attract
customers (e.g. Starbucks or McDonalds);

    
    
      The Court holds, first of all, that making a
      Wi-Fi network available to the general public
      free of charge in order to draw the attention
      of potential customers to the goods and
      services of a shop constitutes an ‘information
      society service’ under the directive on
      [electronic commerce],” the decision reads.
    

However copyright holders can still obtain an injunction forcing the provider
to institute some measure of access control which must collect the identities
of end-users to provide a deterrent. TFA does not mention any requirements on
retention or access to this tracking data.

    
    
      "The Court nevertheless underlines that, in 
      order to ensure that deterrent effect, it is 
      necessary to require users to reveal their 
      identity to be prevented from acting
      anonymously before obtaining the required 
      password,” the ruling adds.
    

So in essence they want to treat open WiFi APs as a type of mini-ISP. I'd say
this is extremely problematic.

If you have to disclose your identity in order to use free WiFi it pretty much
kills free WiFi. The court seemed to understand that terminating the service
was not an appropriate remedy, but then proceeded to shoot it in the back.

~~~
CJefferson
I don't understand why this kills free wi-fi. I use free wi-fi all the time
that wants my name and email address.

~~~
Iv
You live in the time before someone has been indicted for accepting bogus
names and email addresses.

I used to live in a time where you could book a hotel without providing a
valid ID.

------
bluesign
I suspect this logic can also apply to tor exit nodes, which is more
troublesome.

~~~
ayyn0n0n0
There are ways to configure your tor exit node ExitPolicy to be responsible
and to be pro-active against malicious activity and abuse.

If you would like to read more: [http://tornull.org](http://tornull.org)
[https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExi...](https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExitPolicy)

With a minimal amount of work and upkeep. You can cut down on abuse fairly
easily.

~~~
cryptarch
I was under the impression that this was a dangerous thing to do, because by
using custom filtering you implicitly accept responsibility for what illegal
content slips through your filter.

~~~
cryptarch
I can't edit my post anymore, but I couldn't find a source to back this up.
According to the Tor Blog, it should be fine to have a reduced exit policy.

For reference: [https://blog.torproject.org/running-exit-
node](https://blog.torproject.org/running-exit-node)

