> 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 such as Cloudfare can no more disconnect customers for legal,
> if offensive, content than the phone company can, without losing that common
> carrier status.
>
> Cloudfare is being foolish, and hypocritical. They freely, for example, carry
> the equally offensive content of Antifa. Are they going to cut them off too?
>
> In America we have the right to free speech, and the right to use common
> carriers to carry that speech. If a common carrier chooses to censor legal
> speech, which is what Cloudfare has done, then it loses its CC status and can
> now be sued for that speech.
>
> -mel beckman
ISPs are not common carriers, and, in fact, they have the right to carry - or
to not carry - whatever traffic they choose. In fact, for some aspects of
Internet traffic, ISP immunity is specifically written into the law (cf.
CAN-SPAM §8(c) which states that "(c) No EFFECT ON POLICIES OF PROVIDERS OF
INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to have any
effecton the lawfulness or unlawfulness, under any other provision of law, of
the adoption, implementation, or enforcement by a provider of Internet access
service of a policy of declining to transmit, route,relay, handle, or store
certain types of electronic mail messages.").
Anne P. Mitchell, Attorney at Law
CEO/President, Institute for Social Internet Public Policy
Dean of Cybersecurity & Cyberlaw, Lincoln Law School of San Jose
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant
GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Board of Directors, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
Member: California Bar Association
