[FSFLA-Traductores] Re: Brazilian PLC 89/03

[Richard M Stallman]

First, you're right that the DRM part is equally important.
I didn't realize that that part applied to DRM.

    For one, I don't think it's such a big deal that providers maintain
    logs about what IP address they assign to me when I connect to their
    networks, and aggregate traffic accounting.

Logging your IP address and keeping that information makes it possible
to tell that it was you who connected to a certain web site, you who
ran a P2P program, etc.  Therefore, we urge all ISPs NOT to keep
records of such things.  For instance, universities should not record
the IP addresses that students had when they connected to the net.
This is important!

      But, again, there needs to be a sufficient body
    of evidence against a person for such information to be requested,

It is easy for the RIAA (or equivalent) to produce that evidence.
The ONLY protection against their vicious attacks is not to collect
the information in the first place.

    Very bad, indeed, but, given the circumstances, it's not really worse
    than what we have in place today, as evidenced by the legal disputes
    against Google for refusing to provide to Brazilian courts information
    about certain images posted on Orkut.  Because provides *do* maintain
    these logs, and courts already have power to demand them to be
    created, retained and relayed, and this does not change with the bill.

This proves my point.  Google should not have kept that information!
Likewise Google should not have kept any information about who was
accessing YouTube.