25 Jun
2009
25 Jun
'09
12:28 a.m.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Adrian Chadd<adrian@creative.net.au> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Rod - you wouldnt qualify as an ISP - or even a "provider of an interactive computer service" to go by the language in 47 USC 230, by simply running a TOR exit node.
Ah, but would an ISP which currently enjoys whatever the current definition of "common carrier" is these days, running a TOR node, still be covered by said provisions?
ISPs are not common carriers. Geoff Huston is - as always - the guy who explains it best. http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_5-3/uncommon_... -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)