Stanford To Charge Reconnect Fee For DMCA Notices 344
theantipop writes "Stanford didn't like appearing on the MPAA's list of 25 worst offenders. Last week the university issued notice of a new policy in which students are charged a reconnection fee, ranging from $100 to $1000, if they fail to respond quickly enough to a DMCA complaint. The policy is to take effect September 1 this year. As a show of 'good faith' they are graciously allowing all students to start at the $100 fee level for subsequent notices."
Economics here... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Economics here... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
They just use that as the excuse to get uninformed people ( and the government ) to support their actions.
College candidates - reprioritize your preferences (Score:3, Insightful)
A university/college which gives more crap for what money bosses think than its students think is a one that is down the drain. Their reputation and quality of graduates tend to deteriorate rapidly in 5-10 years, which affects even old time graduates.
Just choose a university that cant stomach being a bitch to big buck.
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:2, Insightful)
While I believe that Stanford buckling to "Big Buck" pressure is lame beyond belief, I can't agree with your argument. For prospective students to ignore Stanford because for the next four years they wouldn't be able to easily torrent some movies and risk their future and/or proximity to home by attending another college that happens to ignore the DMCA notices is just shortsighted.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:5, Insightful)
Your implication that 3-5 years of campus life means a hill of beans to the 50-60 years you're likely to spend afterwards suggests to me that you're a recent graduate, if even that.
Let me put it this way. Within 5 years of graduating college, you will have forgotten what it was even like. (That's especially true if you spend the entire time drunk like a lot of college kids do.) So it's a huge mistake to base your choice - which affects your entire life afterwards - on whether or not you like the campus. Ditto for DMCA policies, which are just as irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
You should be basing your college choices on three things, and only three things: a) quality of education, b) reputation in your chosen field, and c) networking opportunities. Using any other criteria is sacrificing decades of your life for a couple of good years that you will probably just forget about once you get out into the real world. The last thing you want is to be stuck in some dead-end job when you're 30, feeling like you have no future and thinking "maybe if I'd gone to a different school, I'd have a better job, more friends and more money right now..."
The good news for you is that it sounds like you may still have time to transfer to MIT. That's assuming you actually got accepted there, of course.
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyway, the quality of education at most top tear schools is extremely over rated. Most of a schools reputation is based around the quality of students they admit not the quality of education they supply. As to networking it's more important to connect with the right type of person than people at the right school. My older sister went to Washington and Lee and avoided connecting to people with money and spent most of her time with the international students and she is making around 1/2 what I do right now. On the other hand, I got my first 2 jobs because I had good connections.
There are a lot of great schools in the US spending a lot of time ranking which is 1st though 15th is a waste of time. Back in HS most people only have a vague understanding of what they want out of life so picking the best CS school is silly when you might end up studding math and getting masters in neuroscience. I think it's most important to pick and environment and social group that you're comfortable with vs. some extremely arbitrary school rank.
PS: In 5 years people look at you funny when you include your collage GPA and in 20 years the collage you went to is little more than a foot note when compared to your work history and grad school. How far you go is more about when you decide to cost than which scool you went to.
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:5, Insightful)
While avoiding Stanford for DMCA reasons may ultimately be a trivial reason, it does show that Stanford puts it's own interests above the education and well being of it's students. Do you really think that this place will have good academic counciling, will encourage you to study what you find interest in, etc.?
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:4, Insightful)
yes it does (Score:5, Insightful)
you are making a mistake of evaluating human beings like machines - better in environments that will bring 'optimal' results for some standard goal.
it is not as such. humans are emotionally, psychologically complex creatures.
spending 3-5 years in an environment that excites you, fires you up, is fun and fulfilling with good atmosphere and social company that SUITS oneself, and in youth years of 18-22, the "free" years, which fundamentally and finally shapes and molds one's character, outlook on life and approach to life makes great positive difference than spending 3-5 years in an environment in which you will live indifference or dislike.
the former makes one into a happy persona that will sail easily through life, the latter makes one into an automaton.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They spend too much time on grades so they'll get into a good grad school
They spend too much time getting a good degree to get a career started
They spend too much time working to raise up through the company ladder
They spend too much time earning money for their retirement
And in all that, they fail to live in the moment. Those are the prime candidates for a mid-life crisis or ending up old and bitter. people that realize
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:5, Insightful)
no "caught" here (Score:5, Interesting)
little different than spanish inquisition eh ?
They're punishing students for ACCUSATIONS (Score:4, Insightful)
The policy fines students for being accused. THE KID DOESN'T HAVE TO BE GUILTY OF ANYTHING, THEY GET FINED FOR BEING ACCUSED. Do *you* want to go to a school where you're not innocent until proven guilty, you're not even guilty until proven innocent, you're just automatically and permanently guilty the moment anyone makes an accusation?
I had to write up the policy for a university dealing with the question of what to do with RIAA complaints a few years ago. In my opinion, Stanford is being *monumentally* stupid. I told the university I worked for to become an ISP and start charging students for internet access if they wanted it, and put no restrictions on that access aside from what minor restrictions an ordinary residential ISP might place. Then it would all be *their* problem, not the university's.
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:2, Insightful)
I tend to disagree a bit here. A universities reputation is based on the quality of its research and how well it's graduates to in the work force. Research is paid for by outside companies which ARE concerned about their IP. A company will not want to be associated with a "pirate" university.
Re: (Score:2)
Last I checked Stanford was a liberal arts university, not a trade school. Their reputation is based on their scholastics, not how much money their graduates make.
jfs
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:College candidates - reprioritize your preferen (Score:2, Funny)
Citizens, Reclaim Your College (Score:3, Insightful)
Just roll Stanford down in your list of preferred colleges/universities.
What and just let the MAFIAA have Stanford and everything it does? NFW. It is outrageous that people can be thrown off their network, fined and out of school without a trial on the word of a big dumb company that's got a reputation for suing innocent people. This needs to be fought at every level. We can't let big dumb publishers destroy public institutions over their pop proffits. Pop music and movies are not worth this. Lawre [wikipedia.org]
University backlash in long term to RIAA (Score:5, Interesting)
So if there is any validity to these observations, then there may be a complete change of view against the RIAA and restrictive copyrights on the part of university administrations in about ten years that will last for another twenty or so afterwards. This pattern of overreaction to extremes followed by an idealogical reversal in the other direction seems to be the general dynamic of university administrations as the younger people who suffered from their positions in the beginning take control of the administrations through the long personnel change process. Often they are the only ones interested in gaining control of universities given the tediousness of administrative processes. Revenge seems to be a good motivator and would explain this tendency to shift between extremes.
So don't worry too much about your university being a poodle to the RIAA cokeheads. It will most likely change over time. In the meantime, set up websites where you can support the fellow students who have been randomly selected for RIAA extortion.
Cheating == DMCA violation? (Score:2)
Even if it was about copyright infringement, let me throw out an idea. It's not really a justification, just a concept:
Maybe if a student is actually pirating interesting stuff -- V for Vendetta, Ghost in the Shell, Firefly, Mythbusters, or take your pick -- it would be part of their education. I don't mean officially, but maybe these kids would actually take something from what they pirate. Given that they're starving college students, it's not like they
Re: (Score:2)
Suddenly I'm thinking we maybe do need all those H1-B's, after all...
Re: (Score:2)
PDF Dump (Score:5, Informative)
Student DMCA Complaint Policy & Reconnection Fee
May 11, 2007
Background
While file-sharing technology has revolutionized our ability to share information
with one other, its illegal use for pirating copyrighted materials is at unacceptable levels
at Stanford. On March 30, 2007 Stanford was listed as one of the Motion Picture
Association of America's top 25 worst offenders
(http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/index.php?id=196 9). We have also had a steep
increase in the number of piracy complaints filed against us by the Recording Industry
Association of America (RIAA).
From September 2006 - January 2007, Stanford received nearly as many Digital
Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) complaints as we received in the entire 2005-06
academic year. Of these complaints, 90% are directed at undergraduate and graduate
students: students who are jeopardizing the Stanford network by using it as platform to
steal songs, movies, TV shows, video games, books and software.
As of May 2007, the RIAA has identified seven Stanford network connections
that have been targeted for its "pre-litigation" notification program
(http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/022807.asp). The RIAA has said that it will
continue to send out pre-litigation notices each month.
Keeping up with the number of file-sharing complaints coming in under the
DMCA has required almost three full-time Stanford employees. It is an irresponsible
waste of Stanford's resources--your tuition dollars--to spend so much staff time
responding to copyright violations.
To defray these costs while underscoring Stanford's stance on copyright,
beginning September 1, 2007, Stanford will charge violators an Internet reconnection fee.
2
Student DMCA Policy
1st DMCA Complaint: The Information Security Office will forward a copy of the
complaint to the student, with an email instructing the student to
remove copyrighted content and respond to the Information
Security Office. A student has 48 hours to respond to the
Information Security Office (ISO) and attend to the DMCA
complaint. If the student addresses the DMCA complaint within
that time, there will be no disconnection, and no reconnection
fee. But if the student does not respond within 48 hours, the
student will be disconnected from the network. Once the DMCA
complaint has been addressed, the student will be charged $100
to be reconnected to the Stanford network.
2nd DMCA Complaint: The Information Security Office will forward a copy of the
complaint to the student and to the student's Residence Dean.
The student will be disconnected immediately from the network.
Once the DMCA complaint has been addressed, the student will
be charged $500 to be reconnected to the Stanford network.
3rd DMCA Complaint: The Information Security Office will forward a copy of the
complaint to the student. The student will be disconnected
immediately from the network. Network privileges will be
terminated. The Information Security Office will file a
complaint with Judicial Affairs for disciplinary action. New
network privileges may be granted at Stanford's discretion upon
the student agreeing to indemnify Stanford against any further
copyright violations, and paying up to $1000 to establish new
privileges.
Fees
Students may pay fees directly to the University within 30 days of the
reconnection; fees remaining unpaid after this time will be added onto monthly
University bills.
Although the purpose of these fees is to discourage piracy and compensate the
University for resources spent dealing with DMCA complaints, for the first year of the
program, the affected departments have agreed that these fees will be transferred to
ASSU's general operating budget to enhance Stanford student activities.
3
Reconnection Fee Effective Date
The imposition of the reconnection fee is the only substantial modification to
Stanford's treatment of DMCA complaints against studen
Re:PDF Dump (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's harsh, but regardless, read the rest of it. After the 2nd notice, the student is automatically disconnected.
So what's to stop them from simply ignoring said notices? I mean, they're a University, surely they're smart enough to say: "Subpeona us, bitches!"
Due diligence. (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, they checked to make sure the charges were real before the instituted the fines, right?
I mean, these wouldn't possibly be trumped up charges after all.
Re: (Score:2)
1) The service provider must act 'expeditiously' to remove access/content ynder various subsections of a)-d).
2) The service provider has in general no liability: g) 1)
3) If the allegations are false, you can send a counternotice and go after the accusing party for damages: f) 2)
Basicly the service provider is just forced to disable/reenable access/content and relay various notifications according to the rules set out in the law. Their job is not to
Re: (Score:2)
Suggestion to Stanford students: (Score:5, Interesting)
Do exactly this. Just go to the dorms, do a quick inventory of what the room numbers are, and send at least two notices each. You can address it to "resident" for each room number, no need to know names or anything else. Alternatively, do a ping sweep (or similar tactic) on your local network, and send notices to their office regarding all IPs you hit -- or simply make shit up, you're bound to hit one or two of the firewalled ones.
Everyone, please coordinate through Slashdot or something similar. Even do it around replies to this comment. Just make sure you aren't duplicating effort. Two is enough to force every single student you troll to be disconnected, once, and fined $100. That should be enough to cause problems for their "Information Security Office" even if the students were happy, and they should be pretty genuinely pissed off about the fines. But if you send more than that, you'll just be inconveniencing the students, not the university.
Also, $100 is really enough. They do threaten that after enough notices, they'll charge $1000, but really, every student has $100 (even if they don't want to let go of it); $1000 is starting to get serious (in case this somehow backfires). I imagine they won't be fined at all, anyway, but don't be an ass.
Now, the reasons I don't agree with this policy:
For higher education, they do sure seem stupid here...
The solution to "spending so much staff time responding to copyright violations" should be really fucking obvious: Don't spend so much staff time responding to copyright violations! Make the students sign something when they get their network access that makes the student -- not Stanford -- responsible for the copyright violation. Then make the RIAA take it to court.
(Does this work, legally? For all I know, the DMCA might have some sort of fine about not responding to copyright violation notices...)
Where'd the other 10% go, pray tell?
Where is your evidence that:
This is why you should send two to each -- to demonstrate how fucking bad this policy is. The MAFIAA has a history of suing grandmothers, 12-year-olds, and dead people, not to mention one woman who had never used a computer or the Internet in her life. Notice how I said "suing", NOT "sent takedown notices".
So, before they even get to the part where they drag you into court for something you didn't do, couldn't have done, or at the very least, their only proof is one screenshot that has your IP in it, Stanford will kick you off the network for the second notice, no matter who sent it or what you've done about the first notice. (The 48 hours only applies to that first notice.)
I'm sorry, but this is the kind of policy that would send me packing instantly. As in, bags packed, out the fucking door, get my transfer credits, drive to my parents' house, and explain that I need a new college. Whether or not I'd been doing anything illegal (which I have, by the way: I play DVDs that I own on Linux!)
Whoops, forgot one thing... (Score:2)
They mention "Ruckus" as an alternative to piracy. Here:
Ruckus is not an acceptable option; songs
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ah, the amateur hacker at work. Stanford's IT people are much more clever than that.
Stanford filters the tackdown notices for "real" ones. Dorm numbers / street addresses aren't enough. A valid takedown request has an IP address and time of connection ... and guess what? Stanf
What if the DMCA notice is fradulent or incorrect? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a bunch of horseshit. The MPAA and RIAA are winning at their game with colleges when more should be turning to the legal minds on campus to see what they can do to shut this finger pointing media game that they are playing.
Re:What if the DMCA notice is fradulent or incorre (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
What if the student isn't around for 48 hours (busy drinking, studying at the library, or fucking their SO at an off-campus location)? They should be given a chance at an in-person interview to explain the situation and fight the "charges" of IP infringement brought before they are charged any
why would they WRITE rules they don't want to use? (Score:2)
So why would they need to write a policy that says they will charge you in such a case?
Hasty, badly-thought-out and excessively severe policy, or chance to rip off their students - you decide.
Is this the solution? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
abuse (Score:5, Insightful)
sweet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
(f) Misrepresentations.-- Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section--
(1) that material or activity is infringing, or
(2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification,
shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys' fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner's authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such mis
Re: (Score:2)
You actually believe this law is enforced? Silly person. You obviously have not been keeping up with the news.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And you are right in that it does open the door for abuse, but I see it less as an avenue for malicious attacks and more of a way of easily filing nuisance lawsuits (cheaper to settle than to fight). The same kind of law suits that big business has been putting up with for years basically extended down to the individual.
Secure transfers (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, just wow (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wow, just wow (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't see any room in this law giving Stanford discretion to make service contingent on receipt of a fee. Of course, IANAL so YMMV.
The short version (Score:4, Insightful)
I didn't see where they had to admit guilt. (Score:2)
What is the justification for this fee? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I see .... (Score:2, Funny)
kid: Mom? Dad? I need some cash, quick, before my webiste goes down.
More generous than before (Score:5, Insightful)
Read it carefully - roughly, after the first notice, it's a $100 fee. After the second notice, it's $500 plus a notice to the residence dean (like a referral to the principle). After the third, it's $1000 plus a referral to Judicial Affairs (which, given Stanford's honor code, is likely to result in a suspension). The previous policy was a network disconnect until a student certifies offending material is removed, the second offense was another disconnect plus a notice to the residence dean, then after the third, referral to Judicial Affairs and a student was PERMENANTLY BANNED from the Stanford network. (Makes it quite difficult to do classwork.) I'm personally bothered with this new policy; makes it too easy for a rich kid to ignore everything.
Stanford's networking folks do look carefully at the notices, protect student privacy unless faced with a court order, and a student can contest the DMCA takedown notice without penalty with the eager assistence of Student Legal Affairs - although doing so waives your privacy. As of two years ago, no student had ever contested a notice - they were all clear-cut DMCA violations. And only well-documented violations ever got passed to students.
Now, let's be honest here ... I have yet to see a single person on Slashdot ever suggest running a file-sharing service from their desktop at work. So exactly why is a university a different story? Regardless of the merits of the DMCA itself (I personally think it's a stupid law, guilty-until-proven-innocent and with punishments far worse than the violation itself), the DMCA is still the law; why should a university be expected to shield individuals engaged in illegal behavior?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not that I think doing it at a university is necessarily a good idea, but it *IS* a different story from work.
1) You live there. Its your home. The expectation of privacy etc in your dorm vs your office/cubicle quite different.
2) You own the computer, not them.
3) You pay a fair bit of money for the services you re
Re: (Score:2)
So what happens, under either the old policy or the new policy, if the student certifies that the offending material does not actually exist (they were misidentified), is not actually online (they have it legally, but someone just broke in and saw it there), is their own genuine work they created, or that the complainant is not the actual owner?
And why does an innocent victim have to give up their privacy just to assert their innocence? If they make a claim to the university and the university can see tha
Re: (Score:2)
Because the law requires the university to provide the counternotice to the sender of the DMCA notification.
No student ever contested a notice? How much does it cost to do that?
It doesn't cost anything, but among the things it must contai
University is a different story (Score:2)
Then there's the problem on non-competitiveness. In
To balance things (Score:2)
The real reason (Score:3, Insightful)
As a show of good faith, for the first year all collected money will not offset the salaries, but will in fact go directly to the student government.
To reiterate, they're just shifting the costs of responding to DMCA complaints onto the students too dumb to get their warez and MP3s from usenet like the rest of us
Ixne on the Oosnetyea (Score:3, Funny)
(it's oosnetyea in pig latin, isn't it?)
Which reminds me...wtf is everthing doing in boneless? Is there some inside joke I missed when I was offline in the late 90s?
Cambridge (Score:2, Informative)
However, I don't really, in all honesty, see the issue. The charges are only imposed if the allegations are "proven" t
Ashamed of my alma mater (Score:3, Insightful)
Piracy is wrong, and Stanford should make every effort to prevent it on their networks. I have no doubt that piracy takes place there. However a review of RIAA court cases would show that they quite often make claims they can't substantiate. In the case of Stanford and its students, where's the proof?
In essence Stanford is being asked to provide the proof. What's worse, the university is looking to make the accused students pay for the investigation before handing them over to their accusers.
I know there are legitimate uses for BitTorrent and the like, but I'd feel better if the university simply blocked its use. Make a proactive effort to prevent piracy, and let that be their defense against the RIAA and MPAA. Continue to educate the students in the issues of copyright and enforce that the same way you enforce other issues--through the student code of conduct.
I understand the need to mitigate the cost of dealing with the RIAA/MPAA. Ideally this would be done by passing the costs on to the people who illegally download copyrighted content rather than all students, which is what this policy attempts to do. That's very difficult when you can't absolutely prove who the pirates are. The RIAA and MPAA have created a climate that adds this additional overhead to the cost of running a large network, and I'm saddened to see that Stanford has decided to pay this tax.
Making deals with the RIAA/MPAA is like making deals with the devil. On the surface you may benefit but in the end you end up losing your soul.
Re:If any of them pay this fee... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why?
It's Stanford's network; if you pirate files and violate the terms of use agreement you signed back when you activated your connection, they've got every right to kick you off the network, and every right to fine you to let you back on. And considering how important the internet is in higher education these days (almost all of my homework assignments, for example, are issued online and occasionally submitted electronically as well), I'd say that paying the fine so you've got your connection back is a pretty good idea.
Paying the fine so they can get their connection back isn't stupid. It's a necessity.
Re:If any of them pay this fee... (Score:4, Insightful)
I haven't either. No need, my hallway had 4 open APs last I checked.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Paying the fine so they can get their connection back isn't stupid. It's a necessity.
The stupidity is in getting disconnected in the first place.
Re:Good! (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)
But beyond that, Stanford is not part of the UC system, and is not particularly publicly funded. I'm sure they get some public money, but so do many other institutes, with or without students. For example, road construction companies derive a large amount of their income from public contracts, and very few construction companies enroll non-employee students.
Does your ignorance make you a loud mouth arrogant bastard with your head up your own ass WHO LEECHES FROM MY INTERWEBS, or should I just excuse you as someone that's angry about not going to college?
Re: (Score:2)
And you're right, we probably don't need many "Klingon Language" degrees. But even with such a silly degree, it's a bit of a stretch to assume that speaking Klingon is the only skill the student picked up while at school. I'm not pretending that underg
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Although the purpose of these fees is to discourage piracy and compensate the
University for resources spent dealing with DMCA complaints, for the first year of the
program, the affected departments have agreed that these fees will be transferred to
ASSU's general operating budget to enhance Stanford student activities."
What shit.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
>A: No, of course it doesn't.
You're right. That's not what Stanford is saying. They're saying "between you, you force us to employ 3 people handling this that we wouldn't otherwise. So we're putting in a tax on the behavior that has caused us to employ them."
Don't like it? Don't steal files. Cry "but I've not been proven guilty" all you want, but the XXaa won't be sending takedown notices of your dissertation and research papers without
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, it wouldn't cost them anything at all to simply ignore the notice (optionally forwarding it to the student named) until and unless they receive a proper legal order from a recognized legal authority or private arbitrator. Obviously Stanford has no obligation to provide Internet access (unless they agreed to do so by contract), but all the costs you bring up are self-imposed. No one made them track down the computer, terminate its internet access, update the student's records, etc. -- they
That is already so. (Score:5, Insightful)
Next you wont be able to graduate unless you pay your unpaid DMCA notices.
Most schools require a zero balance to graduate.
Being denied net access is one of the principle wrongs of the right to read story [gnu.org]. Even today, that is fatal. Witout network access, you can't register for classes. If Stanford has special policies for computers within their network which they deny to computers outside their network all of those services are denied for those "disconnected".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But it is a very effective DoS attack by the RIAA against Stanford's student population. I'm concerned that it could lead to more students taking the RIAA's settlement offer instead of fighting bogus claims. Especially since Stanford's policy provides no option for the student to claim that the RIAA's complaints are completely without merit. The RIAA could simply keep resubmitting letters based on the same faulty
Accessing class materials. (Score:3, Informative)
This 'reconnect' fee policy will likely be sue-worthy.
Re: (Score:2)
What a wonderful learning opportunity the students would have.
Re: (Score:2)
Stanford's "budding lawyers" are quite likely hoping to get jobs with firms that would represent the *AA's and similar big-money interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
on the 2nd notice, they get automatically disconnected, regardless of if they responded that the 1st one was completely bogus.