Former MPAA CTO Tells The White House Why SOPA Is The Wrong Approach For IP Enforcement

from the you're-free-to-speak-now,-paul dept

You may recall who Paul Brigner is. He was formerly the Chief Technology Policy Officer for the MPAA, who at one point was tasked with standing up to pretty much every knowledgeable internet engineer in trying to defend why SOPA was both necessary and wouldn't be a technological disaster. This resulted in some wacky arguments. Back in January, he and I faced off on a panel in Washington DC the day before the Internet blackout, in which he tried to defend the MPAA's position on SOPA, though almost everyone who watched the panel noted that his statements appeared half hearted. It was little surprise two months later to see Brigner leave the MPAA to go work for the Internet Society, who fought strongly against SOPA. Since then, Brigner has more or less admitted that SOPA was a bad idea.

So it's not too surprising, but still a bit ironic, to see that Brigner has written the Internet Society's response to the White House's request for comment on IP Enforcement, and much of it explains why any approach that mirrors SOPA is completely unacceptable. From all indications, this has been Brigner's true belief all along, and you can see it in the depth of explanation and knowledge he puts into this letter as compared to his half-hearted "defenses" of the MPAA when he was employed there. What's striking, however, is how directly Brigner's comments today contradict the claims of the MPAA, which he was responsible for defending just a few months ago. It's almost a step by step argument against the MPAA's position: Brigner/ISOC are against mucking with DNS, are in favor of highlighting the importance of due process and protecting civil liberties and in favor of much greater transparency in policy making.

We are also of the opinion that any enforcement attempts – at both national and international levels – should ensure and not jeopardize the stability, interoperability and efficiency of the Internet, its technologies and underlying platforms. The Internet – a network of networks – is based on an open and distributed architecture. This model should be preserved and should surpass any enforcement efforts. For the Internet Society preserving the original nature of the Internet is particularly significant, especially when enforcement is targeting domain names and the Domain Name System (DNS) in general. There are significant concerns from using the DNS as a channel for intellectual property enforcement and various contributions have been made on this issue by both the Internet Society and the technical community. It needs to be highlighted that from a security perspective, in particular, DNS filtering is incompatible with an important security technology called Domain Name Security Extensions or DNSSEC. In fact, there is great potential for DNSSEC to be weakened by proposals that seek to filter domain names. This means that DNS filtering proposals could ultimately reduce global Internet security, introduce new vulnerabilities, and put individual users at risk.

Our second recommendation relates to the legal tools that should be in place in any enforcement design. ISOC would like to stress the absolute need for any enforcement provisions to be prescribed according to the rule of law and due process. We believe that combating online infringement of intellectual property is a significant objective. However, it is equally important that this objective is achieved through lawful and legal paths and in accordance with the notion of constitutional proportionality. In this regard, enforcement provisions – both within and outside the context of intellectual property – should respect the fundamental human rights and civil liberties of individuals and, subsequently, those of Internet users. They should not seek to impose unbearable constitutional constraints and should not prohibit users from exercising their constitutional rights of free speech, freedom of association and freedom of expression.

As a general recommendation, we would like to emphasize our belief that all discussions pertaining to the Internet, including those relating to intellectual property - both at a national and international level - should follow open and transparent processes.

It's a great filing overall, and I appreciate the Internet Society's longstanding support for these key principles. Similarly, I think it's great that Brigner appears to have found employment much more in line with his own knowledge, experience and personal views -- but there is something ironic about seeing his name on a filing like this just months after he was tasked with arguing the opposite position.

Speaking of the White House's request for comments, that process is still open until this Friday. Later this week, I'll be sharing what I am submitting as well, but I urge many others to post thoughtful comments of their own. You can see what's already been submitted, and unfortunately, it appears that many (on all sides of the issue) submitted short/ranty "internet comment" style comments. I would urge that anyone seeking to submit a comment write out something a bit more thoughtful and detailed if you would like those in the White House to take them seriously.

Filed Under: comments, cto, paul brigner, white house
Companies: isoc, mpaa

Former Chief Tech Policy Officer At MPAA Admits That SOPA Was 'Not Compatible With The Health Of The Internet'

from the indeed dept

We mentioned recently that the Chief Tech Policy Officer at the MPAA, Paul Brigner, had jumped ship to the Internet Society -- whose position on SOPA was diametrically opposed to the MPAA's position on SOPA and similar concepts. While there was some concern that ISOC was moving away from its strong internet freedom stance, many of us suspected that perhaps the reason Brigner jumped ship was that his own views were much more in line with ISOC's. Indeed, he's now told News.com that he thinks SOPA isn't just a bad idea, but that it's not good for the health of the internet:

"Did my position on this issue evolve over the last 12 months? I am not ashamed to admit that it certainly did," Brigner writes. "The more I became educated on the realities of these issues, the more I came to the realization that a mandated technical solution just isn't mutually compatible with the health of the Internet."

And how does the MPAA feel about this?

A spokesman for the MPAA said his organization would not comment on Brigner's volte-face.

Well, what can you say when your (now former) chief tech expert agrees with what every other tech expert has been saying all along?

Filed Under: internet, mpaa, paul brigner, sopa

MPAA CTO Jumps Ship To Internet Society, An Opponent Of Greater Online Copyright Enforcement

from the changing-his-tune? dept

Back in January, the day before the big anti-SOPA blackout, I was on a panel at the Congressional Internet Caucus' State of the Net event, and one of the other panelists was the MPAA's Chief Technology Policy Officer, Paul Brigner. Brigner had been somewhat vocal in defending the MPAA's position on SOPA/PIPA -- and especially its view that there were no problems with DNS blocking. In a blog post last summer, he wrote:

DNSSEC was designed to provide consumers with a secure, trusted connection to services like online banking, commercial transactions, and electronic medical records - not to foreign websites operated by criminals for the purpose of offering counterfeit and infringing works. These evolving protocols should be flexible enough to allow for government, acting pursuant to a court order, to protect intellectual property online.

That shows a rather complete misunderstanding of how DNSSEC works, which is odd, because Brigner should know better. However, in the brief time that I did get to talk with Brigner, he struck me as one of the more reasonable folks at the MPAA, and I wondered if he was pressured into writing such nonsense that completely misses the point. In fact, on that panel back in January, it seemed pretty clear that he was conflicted about his views on this particular issue.

I bring all this up, because Brigner has left the MPAA after just about a year, and has joined the Internet Society, an organization who has made it clear that it opposes these efforts to expand online enforcement strategies. There's been some concern that Brigner now becomes the MPAA's voice over at ISOC, and moves them away from this position.

I'm hopeful, however, that the true story is that ISOC's position on things is a lot more aligned with what Brigner's true feelings on these matters are, and that what he said while employed by the MPAA was more about the job than what he really felt.

Filed Under: copyright, paul brigner, sopa
Companies: isoc, mpaa