nanog mailing list archives
Re: Megaupload.com seized
From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 17:08:06 -0500 (EST)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick B" <nick () pelagiris org>
I'm about 90% sure that in a fair court, it would be concluded that disabling the reported URL qualifies as disabling access to the material. The court might then issue an injunction to, in the future, disable *all* *possible* access to the material, but that's not the current text of the law. YMMV
I believe we're all conflating 2 separate and, really, disparate things: 1) what does the law actually require and is that realistic? 2) how were MU actually behaving, and does that relieve The Law of cutting them any slack? The former isn't really affected by the latter; it can still be unreasonable, even if that is *not* the reason why MU proper won't be getting cut any slack which might exist. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Current thread:
- RE: Megaupload.com seized, (continued)
- RE: Megaupload.com seized George Bonser (Jan 22)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Michael Thomas (Jan 21)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Joel jaeggli (Jan 21)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Michael Thomas (Jan 21)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Jay Ashworth (Jan 21)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Steven Bellovin (Jan 21)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Roland Perry (Jan 22)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Nick B (Jan 22)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Joseph Snyder (Jan 22)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Robert Bonomi (Jan 22)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Jay Ashworth (Jan 22)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Kevin Day (Jan 21)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Joly MacFie (Jan 20)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Joly MacFie (Jan 20)
- RE: Megaupload.com seized Don Bowman (Jan 23)
- Re: Megaupload.com seized Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 23)