nanog mailing list archives

Re: Court orders for blocking of streaming services


From: Mel Beckman <mel () beckman org>
Date: Sun, 8 May 2022 14:39:06 +0000

Masataka,

But the phrase “or linking to the domain” Includes hundreds, possibly thousands, of unwitting certain parties: anyone 
who operates search services, or permits people to post links in discussion groups, for example, would be included. 

I think I am simply right. 

The lawsuit is contradictory and overreaching. But worse, the court  issued a nonsensical judgment, whether to deliver 
it or not, and that is a travesty.

 -mel

On May 8, 2022, at 6:29 AM, Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp> wrote:

Mel Beckman wrote:

The plaintiff’s won a default judgement, because the defendants
didn’t show up in court. But they could not have shown up in court,
because they were only listed as "John Does" in the lawsuit. Thus no
defendant could have "actual knowledge" that they were sued,

As the defendants are those identified as "d/b/a Israel.tv, as
the owners and operators of the website, service and/or
applications (the “Website”) located at or linking to the
domain www.Israel.TV;", you are simply wrong.

For the court to then
approve sanctions against innocent non-parties to the suit is a
logical contradiction.

Wrong.

Those knowingly actively cooperating with the defendants are not
innocent at all though DMCA makes some passive cooperation
innocent.

                       Masataka Ohta

Current thread: