nanog mailing list archives
Re: State Super-DMCA Too True
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:11:31 -0600
Dan Hollis wrote:
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Jack Bates wrote:On the other hand, an ISP that *is* aware of illegal activity would be negligent not to look into it.How about the tier1's who route abuse@ to /dev/null? IMHO they are negligent and should be held liable...
I completely agree. Of course, they may be relying on the fact that they don't do anything outside of the scope of being a common carrier, so they shouldn't be held liable, despite the fact that they go against the agreed upon common good (i.e. abuse@ being manned).
-Jack
Current thread:
- RE: State Super-DMCA Too True, (continued)
- RE: State Super-DMCA Too True todd glassey (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)
- RE: State Super-DMCA Too True todd glassey (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Richard A Steenbergen (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Alex Lambert (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)
- RE: State Super-DMCA Too True todd glassey (Mar 31)
- RE: State Super-DMCA Too True Kuhtz, Christian (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Jack Bates (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Dan Hollis (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Jack Bates (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Dan Hollis (Mar 31)
- RE: State Super-DMCA Too True todd glassey (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)
- Re: State Super-DMCA Too True Stephen Sprunk (Mar 31)