Sony Music Says DNS Service Is Implicated In Copyright Infringement At The Domains It Resolves

from the first-they-came-for-the-resolvers dept

One of the characteristics of maximalist copyright companies is their limitless sense of entitlement. No matter how much copyright is extended, be it in duration, or breadth of application, they want it extended even more. No matter how harsh the measures designed to tackle copyright infringement, they want them made yet harsher. And no matter how distantly connected to an alleged copyright infringement a company or organization or person may be, they want even those bystanders punished.

A worrying example of this concerns Quad9, a free, recursive, anycast DNS platform (Cloudflare has technical details on what “recursive” means in this context). It is operated by the Quad9 Foundation, a Swiss public-benefit, not-for-profit organization, whose operational budget comes from sponsorships and donations. In other words, it’s one of the good guys, trying to protect millions of users around the world from malware and phishing, and receiving nothing in return. But that’s not how Sony Music GmbH sees it:

In June, Quad9 was served with a notice from the Hamburg Germany court (310 O 99/21) stating that Quad9 must stop resolving certain domain names that Sony Music GmbH believed were implicated in infringement on properties that Sony claims are covered by their copyrights. Quad9 has no relationship with any of the parties who were involved in distributing or linking to the content, and Quad9 acts as a standard DNS recursive resolver for users in Germany to resolve those names and others.

Sony Music is not alleging that Quad9 is infringing on copyright directly, but that its DNS service allows people to access a Web site that has links to material on a second Web site that infringes on copyrights. On this basis, the Hamburg Court has used Germany’s law on indirect liability to order Quad9 to cease resolving the names of those sites. But as the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte explains, there’s a crazy twist here. Under German law:

[Internet] service providers who provide access to unlawful information or transmit such information are expressly no longer liable for damages or responsible for removal, nor can an injunction be granted against them. However, the Hamburg Regional Court assumes that Quad9 cannot invoke this liability privilege because it does not itself route the copyright-infringing information from A to B, but merely provides indirect access to it. This understanding of the law leads to the contradictory result that Quad9 is deemed liable for copyright infringements precisely because it has even less to do with the copyright infringements than Internet access providers, who are equally not involved in copyright infringements but at least do transmit the data in question.

Quad9’s FAQ on the case points out that if allowed to stand:

this would set a dangerous precedent for all services used in retrieving web pages. Providers of browsers, operating systems or antivirus software could be held liable as interferers on the same grounds if they do not prevent the accessibility of copyright-infringing websites.

The past history of media companies suggest that, given such a capability, they would indeed go after all of these incidental operators, as part of an insane quest to put every aspect of the Internet at the service of copyright.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter, Diaspora, or Mastodon.

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: quad9, sony music

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Sony Music Says DNS Service Is Implicated In Copyright Infringement At The Domains It Resolves”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
64 Comments
Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

The GPL prevents other people from using your code in proprietary programs. In doing so, it effectively forces developers to either license their code under the GPL (thereby making it available to anyone who wants a copy) or not use your code at all.

If copyright did not exist, anyone could develop a closed-source program with open-source components, and nobody could do anything about it. And, since reverse engineering binaries is hard (even more so if this hypothetical developer decided to obfuscate their code), it would be difficult to notice any copying was taking place.

This type of GPL violations do happen — but they’re illegal, and you’ll be forced to release the entirety of your codebase if you get caught.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

The GPL prevents other people from legally using your code in proprietary programs.

FTFY. The difference is 3-15 years of litigation and money with enough digits to wrap your checkbook. But it would be keen if the GPL did have the superpower of physically preventing use in proprietary programs, wouldn’t it?

Ehud Gavronsays:

DNS as an encyclopedia

Others have already addressed the absurdities of German courts, Swiss sites (err??) etc. Yup.

DNS is a one-way client-server lookup of resource records (RRs). Typically it is a search for an IP address (A record) or IPv6 address (AAAA record) as a result of a text string "domain.name.goes.here."

This is no different than an encyclopedia or a phone book, both of which have protection under US copyright laws. If a company chooses to publish one with records that reflect unlawful activity, that’s a protected right in the US.

Disclosure: I run DNS servers. Some have subdomains administered by clients who set their own lookup name and RRs. None will be taken down based on any action of any court. Lawyers will get richer, and stupid laws will be denied.

Ehud

Ehud Gavronsays:

DNS as an encyclopedia

Others have already addressed the absurdities of German courts, Swiss sites (err??) etc. Yup.

DNS is a one-way client-server lookup of resource records (RRs). Typically it is a search for an IP address (A record) or IPv6 address (AAAA record) as a result of a text string "domain.name.goes.here."

This is no different than an encyclopedia or a phone book, both of which have protection under US copyright laws. If a company chooses to publish one with records that reflect unlawful activity, that’s a protected right in the US.

Disclosure: I run DNS servers. Some have subdomains administered by clients who set their own lookup name and RRs. None will be taken down based on any action of any court. Lawyers will get richer, and stupid laws will be denied.

Ehud

Whoeversays:

Swiss, you say, and not subject to US law?

$ whois 9.9.9.9

#

ARIN WHOIS data and services are subject to the Terms of Use

available at: https://www.arin.net/resources/registry/whois/tou/

#

If you see inaccuracies in the results, please report at

https://www.arin.net/resources/registry/whois/inaccuracy_reporting/

#

Copyright 1997-2021, American Registry for Internet Numbers, Ltd.

#

NetRange: 9.9.9.0 – 9.9.9.255
CIDR: 9.9.9.0/24
NetName: CLEAN-97
NetHandle: NET-9-9-9-0-1
Parent: NET9 (NET-9-0-0-0-0)
NetType: Direct Assignment
OriginAS: AS19281
Organization: Quad9 (CLEAN-97)
RegDate: 2017-09-13
Updated: 2020-05-22
Ref: https://rdap.arin.net/registry/ip/9.9.9.0

OrgName: Quad9
OrgId: CLEAN-97
Address: 1442 A Walnut Street, Suite 501
City: Berkeley
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 94709
Country: US
RegDate: 2017-09-07
Updated: 2021-01-19
Comment: https://quad9.net/
Comment: Global Public Recursive DNS Resolver Service
Ref: https://rdap.arin.net/registry/entity/CLEAN-97

Whoeversays:

Swiss, you say, and not subject to US law?

$ whois 9.9.9.9

#

ARIN WHOIS data and services are subject to the Terms of Use

available at: https://www.arin.net/resources/registry/whois/tou/

#

If you see inaccuracies in the results, please report at

https://www.arin.net/resources/registry/whois/inaccuracy_reporting/

#

Copyright 1997-2021, American Registry for Internet Numbers, Ltd.

#

NetRange: 9.9.9.0 – 9.9.9.255
CIDR: 9.9.9.0/24
NetName: CLEAN-97
NetHandle: NET-9-9-9-0-1
Parent: NET9 (NET-9-0-0-0-0)
NetType: Direct Assignment
OriginAS: AS19281
Organization: Quad9 (CLEAN-97)
RegDate: 2017-09-13
Updated: 2020-05-22
Ref: https://rdap.arin.net/registry/ip/9.9.9.0

OrgName: Quad9
OrgId: CLEAN-97
Address: 1442 A Walnut Street, Suite 501
City: Berkeley
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 94709
Country: US
RegDate: 2017-09-07
Updated: 2021-01-19
Comment: https://quad9.net/
Comment: Global Public Recursive DNS Resolver Service
Ref: https://rdap.arin.net/registry/entity/CLEAN-97

Anonymoussays:

Maybe there’s a treaty between the USA and Germany or the EU Re the ability to remove or block websites or domains that may host links to illegal or infringing content . If dns providers can be sued then almost any company or service could be sued if it provides a services to websites that link to illegal content Germany has laws that are different than most European country’s in reference to copyright infringement

Anonymoussays:

Maybe there’s a treaty between the USA and Germany or the EU Re the ability to remove or block websites or domains that may host links to illegal or infringing content . If dns providers can be sued then almost any company or service could be sued if it provides a services to websites that link to illegal content Germany has laws that are different than most European country’s in reference to copyright infringement

Ehud Gavronsays:

Treaties about DNS servers

Maybe there’s a treaty

No, there isn’t. I’ll try not to bore you with the history but DNS was originally handled by the US military, then the US DoC. They created IANA and ICANN to offload the oversight and stuff. Both IANA and ICANN quickly became money-grubbing add-nothings. Karl Auerbach has expounded on this much better than I could so I recommend reading his thoughts.

At any rate

  • no treaties
  • all contract law as per registration "agreements" (look up "contract of adhesion" if you want to know your rights…)
  • failure to resolve and return a resource record is a no-no

Ehud

Ehud Gavronsays:

Treaties about DNS servers

Maybe there’s a treaty

No, there isn’t. I’ll try not to bore you with the history but DNS was originally handled by the US military, then the US DoC. They created IANA and ICANN to offload the oversight and stuff. Both IANA and ICANN quickly became money-grubbing add-nothings. Karl Auerbach has expounded on this much better than I could so I recommend reading his thoughts.

At any rate

  • no treaties
  • all contract law as per registration "agreements" (look up "contract of adhesion" if you want to know your rights…)
  • failure to resolve and return a resource record is a no-no

Ehud

That Anonymous Cowardsays:

Can we get Sonys left hand to sue the right hand?

If they didn’t make content that could be pirated, then no one would pirate their content.

They are causing this problem & we demand in injunction to stop them from continuing to release content that will indirectly cause more piracy.
With this 1 injunction we could end all piracy against Sony and I see nothing wrong with this idea we shoudl execute it immediately.

That Anonymous Cowardsays:

Can we get Sonys left hand to sue the right hand?

If they didn’t make content that could be pirated, then no one would pirate their content.

They are causing this problem & we demand in injunction to stop them from continuing to release content that will indirectly cause more piracy.
With this 1 injunction we could end all piracy against Sony and I see nothing wrong with this idea we shoudl execute it immediately.

Ehud Gavronsays:

GPL

GPL enforcement and litigation is easily found so I’ll leave it to the reader, so should he/she be inclined to do so.

The GPL prevents other people from using your code in proprietary programs.

No, that’s not what the GPL does. The GPL provides specific licenses to allow use of the code. In almost all cases, providing you release the code or make it available, the GPL is a nonissue.

Some companies use GPL code as part of their proprietary stuff without releasing the code. They get sued, and thus far have failed to win [like "lost" but with private settlements so hard to say] 100% of the time.

E

Ehud Gavronsays:

GPL

GPL enforcement and litigation is easily found so I’ll leave it to the reader, so should he/she be inclined to do so.

The GPL prevents other people from using your code in proprietary programs.

No, that’s not what the GPL does. The GPL provides specific licenses to allow use of the code. In almost all cases, providing you release the code or make it available, the GPL is a nonissue.

Some companies use GPL code as part of their proprietary stuff without releasing the code. They get sued, and thus far have failed to win [like "lost" but with private settlements so hard to say] 100% of the time.

E

Ehud Gavronsays:

127/8

The whole /8 is the loopback interface (lo0 on some systems). It doesn’t have to end in 0.0.1… just start with 127.

Trivia (arcana?):
1973 was a very different year than 2021. People did not have personal computers, phones did not communicate with towers, and IPv4 addresses would "never run out." Assigning a /8 to ARPA (Net-10), MILNET (Net-26), loopback (Net-127), and even MIT made a mint selling part of their "assigned and necessary" /8 of IPv4 addresses.
https://www.networkworld.com/article/3191503/mit-selling-8-million-coveted-ipv4-addresses-amazon-a-buyer.html

Ehud Gavronsays:

127/8

The whole /8 is the loopback interface (lo0 on some systems). It doesn’t have to end in 0.0.1… just start with 127.

Trivia (arcana?):
1973 was a very different year than 2021. People did not have personal computers, phones did not communicate with towers, and IPv4 addresses would "never run out." Assigning a /8 to ARPA (Net-10), MILNET (Net-26), loopback (Net-127), and even MIT made a mint selling part of their "assigned and necessary" /8 of IPv4 addresses.
https://www.networkworld.com/article/3191503/mit-selling-8-million-coveted-ipv4-addresses-amazon-a-buyer.html

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re:

The GPL prevents other people from using your code in proprietary programs. In doing so, it effectively forces developers to either license their code under the GPL (thereby making it available to anyone who wants a copy) or not use your code at all.

If copyright did not exist, anyone could develop a closed-source program with open-source components, and nobody could do anything about it. And, since reverse engineering binaries is hard (even more so if this hypothetical developer decided to obfuscate their code), it would be difficult to notice any copying was taking place.

This type of GPL violations do happen — but they’re illegal, and you’ll be forced to release the entirety of your codebase if you get caught.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Report this ad??|??Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
12:25 Australian Privacy Commissioner Says 7-Eleven Broke Privacy Laws By Scanning Customers' Faces At Survey Kiosks (6)
10:50 Missouri Governor Doubles Down On 'View Source' Hacking Claim; PAC Now Fundraising Over This Bizarrely Stupid Claim (45)
10:45 Daily Deal: The All-in-One Microsoft, Cybersecurity, And Python Exam Prep Training Bundle (0)
09:43 Want To Understand Why U.S. Broadband Sucks? Look At Frontier Communications In Wisconsin, West Virginia (8)
05:36 Massachusetts College Decides Criticizing The Chinese Government Is Hate Speech, Suspends Conservative Student Group (71)
19:57 Le Tigre Sues Barry Mann To Stop Copyright Threats Over Song, Lights Barry Mann On Fire As Well (21)
16:07 Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment (15)
13:37 Two Years Later, Judge Finally Realizes That A CDN Provider Is Not Liable For Copyright Infringement On Websites (21)
12:19 Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate (158)
10:55 Verizon 'Visible' Wireless Accounts Hacked, Exploited To Buy New iPhones (8)
10:50 Daily Deal: The MacOS 11 Course (0)
07:55 Suing Social Media Sites Over Acts Of Terrorism Continues To Be A Losing Bet, As 11th Circuit Dumps Another Flawed Lawsuit (11)
02:51 Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is) (100)
19:51 Facebook AI Moderation Continues To Suck Because Moderation At Scale Is Impossible (26)
16:12 Content Moderation Case Studies: Snapchat Disables GIPHY Integration After Racist 'Sticker' Is Discovered (2018) (11)
13:54 Arlo Makes Live Customer Service A Luxury Option (8)
12:05 Delta Proudly Announces Its Participation In The DHS's Expanded Biometric Collection Program (5)
11:03 LinkedIn (Mostly) Exits China, Citing Escalating Demands For Censorship (14)
10:57 Daily Deal: The Python, Git, And YAML Bundle (0)
09:37 British Telecom Wants Netflix To Pay A Tax Simply Because Squid Game Is Popular (32)
06:41 Report: Client-Side Scanning Is An Insecure Nightmare Just Waiting To Be Exploited By Governments (35)
20:38 MLB In Talks To Offer Streaming For All Teams' Home Games In-Market Even Without A Cable Subscription (10)
15:55 Appeals Court Says Couple's Lawsuit Over Bogus Vehicle Forfeiture Can Continue (15)
13:30 Techdirt Podcast Episode 301: Scarcity, Abundance & NFTs (0)
12:03 Hollywood Is Betting On Filtering Mandates, But Working Copyright Algorithms Simply Don't Exist (66)
10:45 Introducing The Techdirt Insider Discord (4)
10:40 Daily Deal: The Dynamic 2021 DevOps Training Bundle (0)
09:29 Criminalizing Teens' Google Searches Is Just How The UK's Anti-Cybercrime Programs Roll (19)
06:29 Canon Sued For Disabling Printer Scanners When Devices Run Out Of Ink (41)
20:51 Copyright Law Discriminating Against The Blind Finally Struck Down By Court In South Africa (7)
More arrow