FYI, Bloomberg BusinessWeek published TODAY a 3,200-word article by Felix Gillette entitled "Section 230 Was Supposed to Make the Internet a Better Place. It Failed" https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-08-07/section-230-was-supposed-... Tony Patti [SW_logo_HighRes]<http://www.swalter.com/> CIO t: (215) 867-8401 f: (215) 268-7184 e: tony@swalter.com<mailto:tony@swalter.com> w: www.swalter.com<http://www.swalter.com/> -----Original Message----- From: NANOG <nanog-bounces@nanog.org> On Behalf Of Mel Beckman Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 11:36 PM To: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: What can ISPs do better? Removing racism out of internet John, Please reread my comments. I did not say “carriers” and specifically excluded the FCC’s definition. I said “Common Carriers”, as defined by Common Law. The DMCA asserts that they must operate as CCs under this definition: in order to get protection under Safe Harbor they must function as a “passive conduit” of information. -mel via cell
On Aug 6, 2019, at 7:36 PM, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com<mailto:johnl@iecc.com>> wrote:
In article <6956E76B-E6B7-409F-A636-C7607BFD881C@beckman.org<mailto:6956E76B-E6B7-409F-A636-C7607BFD881C@beckman.org>> you write:
Mehmet,
I’m not sure if you understand the terms under which ISPs operate as “common carriers”, and thus enjoy immunity from lawsuits due to the acts of their customers.
ISPs in the U.S. are not carriers and never have been. Even the ISPs
that are subsidaries of telcos, which are common carriers for their
telco operations, are not common carriers for their ISPs.
This should not come as surprise to anyone who's spent 15 minutes
looking at the relevant law.
ISPs are probably protected by 47 USC 230(c)(1) but all of the case
law I know is related to web sites or hosting providers.