![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Following the wikileaks case
Hello,
As you know one of our customers, by renting a dedicated server, has become one of the hosts of the site wikileaks. This site asks many questions about its legality in French territory. OVH is neither the host nor the publisher site. OVH is neither for nor against wikileaks. OVH is contractually responsible for the technical service provider hosts ie providing a server, electricity, cooling, buildings for physical security and Internet connection. And to ensure service availability 24 hours 24. Turnkey. In 1 hour. The political world deemed OVH as responsible the hosting of this site. Usually, the law LCEN provides for notification of clearly unlawful contents with a legal basis. We get 3 to 5 notifications per day for different pages from the 6'500'000 sites hosted on our network (racist, xenophobia, etc.) and we pass the hosts involved. Thus, the host becomes aware the pages are clearly illegal and asks the publisher to remove them. 99% Notifications are processed within hours and all functioning perfectly. We also have customers in Europe and we comply with the national contract in each country that OVH is installed. On the site Wikileaks, to date we have received no notification to be sent to our customer. May be it, has he received a directive. That we do not know. In any case, OVH received nothing. Given the accusations and the delicate position in which OVH ended up, we decided to seek the advice of the Justice as to whether the site or specific pages within the site are manifestly unlawful. For this, we decided to use proceedings on application which allows you to request the opinion of a judge quickly and without contradictory discussion. We did not make interlocutory proceedings, because it requires that a party assigns another party to justice. Result in only debate contradiction may be made and the judge can decide. As OVH is neither for nor against this site, we do not assign the customer. So Friday at 16h, we have applied very fast with the TGI Lille. It was rejected with the reasons following: "Let us reject the request, the company OVH does not justify of the need for her to obtain judicial authorization to suspend the hosting of the website. "This is because only 1 hour to prepare the statement is little and so we simplified the application up by stating that OVH was the host site (which is not the case, but it allowed us to do this as of Friday). The judge ruled to 17.30 ... http://demo.ovh.net/download/7a0c424...ks_lille_1.pdf So, our lawyers have worked all weekend to prepare an application complete with all necessary parts. This application was submitted today and pleaded with a judge at TGI de Lille in Paris and another at the same time. The judge in Lille has confirmed its decision of Friday. We have not yet the document signed by him with the exact motivations. It will be tomorrow and we'll connect. The Paris judge said the case was complex and argued that the request be upwind of the First Vice-President of TGI of Paris. It was done. He felt that our request should be rejected but requested the opinion of the President of TGI Paris that he was not of that opinion, and referred the case to the first judge who dismissed him after our application on the grounds that such a case required an adversarial hearing. We have not yet signed the document in his hand, we have tomorrow and we'll publish it. Here are the queries: http://demo.ovh.net/download/7a0c424...ks_lille_2.pdf http://demo.ovh.net/download/7a0c424...eaks_paris.pdf These decisions are consistent with what we expected ... In the present state of things, there are several scenarios: - LCEN accordance with the law requires that "someone" make a notification of clearly illegal content with the hosting with legal foundations for the latter to withdraw any such content. - Otherwise it is necessary that "someone" assigned by our client referred (The host and it will eventually assign the client wikileaks in his capacity as editor). A adversarial discussion can take place and the judge can decide. - Otherwise it is necessary that "someone" seize the judges referred and calls to censor the site in French territory. It is a truly exceptional procedure. There is a precedent in the history of justice with the case concerning site "aaargh". With sites on the games, this procedure begins to be used. OVH, the technical service provider, believe we have made every effort to clarify the legal position of the site. Anyway, we tried to be as transparent as possible. OVH will execute any legal decision that will be communicated. To journalists: we are sorry that we do not answer directly to your requests. This issue which is a big thing for governments is too complicated to be handled directly by OVH. It is necessary for OVH to communicate in a very functional way to control each word in our mails. One day (maybe), we'll control our communication enough to be able to do so in a more emotional way. Anyway, today we are not ready to do it that way. Regards Octave for information and understanding of the issues: who is OVH? OVH, with its 85,000 dedicated servers, is No. 1 in Europe in renting dedicated servers. OVH is also No. 2 in Europe and No. 6 in the world in the number of hosted sites. OVH is also a telephone operator and has 30,000 phones used in France. OVH is historically a French company but has 15 subsidiaries, including 12 in Europe. Its 350 employees work 24/7 for the satisfaction of its 400,000 1,500,000 direct clients and indirect clients. A family company. Last edited by fozl; 12-07-2010 at 10:06 AM. |
![]() |
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: le cas wikileaks la suite
Hello,
As promised, here are the exact orders signed by judges with the exact text we received yesterday evening (lille) and this morning (paris) from the queries we did Monday. http://demo.ovh.net/download/7e16478...ance_paris.pdf http://demo.ovh.net/download/7e16478...ce_lille_2.pdf Regards Octave Last edited by Neil; 12-08-2010 at 05:33 PM. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
|
|