Wrong, wrong, wrong, Dr. Wrongy W. Wrongenstein. If you're served with notice that you have a downstream customer /conducting business that's illegal or tortious/ , you can't ignore it.. IANAL(yet), but ISPs don't really enjoy the same rights as "public carriers" s/a telcos. And in this case, ISP didnt act to protect itself under safe-harbor. They just liked the cash. They're not responsible for inspecting "tens of millions of packets per second". Where'd that come from? They _are_ responsible for ignoring FedEx'd documents containing C&Ds / notices of infringement. Some 15 violations, if you read the decision. (C07-03952JW) Jury findings: 10: "Did [Louis Vuitton] prove that [ISP] knew ... that one or more of (their) customers were using (their services) to directly infringe the copyrights of [Vuitton] and that (ISP could still provide services but not the infringing website(s))?" -YES- 12: "Did [ISP] (act in a manner that would protect them under DMCA Safe Harbor"? -NO- 13: "Did [ISP] (do this willfully)?" -YES- Your business break the law in the name of the Dollar, your business will pay. That's the precedent here. And, btw, "How do I configure my router for legal discussions on nanog-L?" OT. -j On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:35 PM, <nanog@wbsconnect.com> wrote:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Louis-Vuitton-Awarded-324-bw-3561952192.html?x=0&.v=1

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. (“Louis Vuitton”) part of LVMH, the world’s leading luxury group, today announced that it has won the lawsuit it filed in 2007 against the California based Internet hosting business of Akanoc Solutions, Inc., Managed Solutions Group, Inc., and Steven Chen (the “Akanoc Defendants”) in the United States District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose). On August 28th, the jury found the Akanoc Defendants liable for contributory trademark and copyright infringement, and awarded statutory damages in the amount of $32,400,000.00. The court is expected shortly to issue a permanent injunction banning the Akanoc Defendants from hosting websites that sell counterfeit or infringing Louis Vuitton goods.

Any and all nefarious activity alleged in this lawsuit was conducted by a customer, of a customer, of a customer yet the hosting provider was found liable, not the actual criminal manufacturing and selling the fakes.

We had all better watch our backs since it seems that claims of not being able to inspected tens of millions of packets per second is no longer a viable excuse.