nanog mailing list archives
Re: Major Labels v. Backbones
From: Jim Hickstein <jxh () jxh com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:23:31 -0700
--On Friday, August 16, 2002 10:03 PM -0400 John Ferriby <john () ferriby com> wrote:
If there are any legal eagles here, can a Common Carrier be a contributing infringer?
IANAL, but last I looked -- admittedly a long, long time ago -- ISPs were not afforded protection as common carriers (18 USC?), no matter how much they tried to act like them. Has this changed?
Current thread:
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones, (continued)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Marshall Eubanks (Aug 18)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Tim Thorne (Aug 18)
- Anyone from Prodigy or L3 listening? (W32/Yaha Complaint) Richard Forno (Aug 18)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Jeff Ogden (Aug 19)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Stephen J. Wilcox (Aug 19)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Greg Maxwell (Aug 19)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones JC Dill (Aug 19)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Miles Fidelman (Aug 19)
- Message not available
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Jeff Ogden (Aug 20)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones bmanning (Aug 20)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Jeff Ogden (Aug 17)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Jared Mauch (Aug 17)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Majdi S. Abbas (Aug 17)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 17)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Owen DeLong (Aug 19)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Jeff S Wheeler (Aug 19)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones David Schwartz (Aug 19)