Mel, this is to ack your note. "Because I'm a lawyer" isn't an argument at all, *nor have I made it* - however, that I'm extremely busy, and under no obligation to provide any of this information here, is. I'm not here for academic debate. You are also free to bring a lawsuit based on ISP as common carrier, but you will lose.
Anne > On Aug 5, 2019, at 12:19 PM, Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: > > Anne of Many Titles, > > I notice you didn’t provide any actual data to support your position. What, > for example, outside of copyright violations, could ISPs conceivably be > liable for? Present an argument to make your case. “No, because I’m a lawyer > and you’re not” is not an argument :) > > As clearly stated in DMC 512(a), the safe harbor provision for transitory > transport, which is what Cloudfare provides, > > "protects service providers who are passive conduits from liability for > copyright infringement, even if infringing traffic passes through their > networks. In other words, provided the infringing material is being > transmitted at the request of a third party to a designated recipient, is > handled by an automated process without human intervention, is not modified > in any way, and is only temporarily stored on the system, the service > provider is not liable for the transmission.” > > That’s not a law school student opinion. That’s the law itself. As I > previously said, I’m not talking about the FCC definition of CC. Under DMCA, > "service providers who are passive conduits” are the essence of the common > law definition of Common Carrier > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier). > > Incidentally, Network Neutrality wasn’t enacted until 2015, and classified > ISPs as FCC CCs purely to bring them under regulation by the FCC. DMCA was > passed in 1998, and Safe Harbor is based on the fact that ISPs are “passive > conduits". NN has nothing to do with the common carrier aspect of ISPs as > "service providers who are passive conduits”. > > -mel > >> On Aug 5, 2019, at 9:41 AM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitch...@isipp.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Aug 5, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: >>> >>> Patrick, >>> >>> You’re confusing the FCC’s definition of common carrier for telecom >>> regulatory purposes, and the DMCA definition, which specifically grants >>> ISPs protection from litigation through its Safe Harbor provision, as long >>> as they operate as pure common carriers: >>> >>> “Section 512(a) provides a safe harbor from liability for ISPs, provided >>> that they operate their networks within certain statutory bounds, generally >>> requiring the transmission of third-party information without interference, >>> modification, storage, or selection. [emphasis mine] >>> >>> http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v27/27HarvJLTech257.pdf >>> >>> -mel >> >> Section 512(a) applies very specifically to the copyright infringement issue >> as addressed in the DMCA. While I don't disagree that this law school >> paper, written while Lovejoy was a law student, in 2013, could be read as >> if ISPs were common carriers, they are not, and were not. Even if it were >> headed that way, actions by the current FTC and administration rolled back >> net neutrality efforts in 2017, four years after this student paper was >> published. >> >> All that said, this is very arcane stuff, and ever-mutating, so it's not at >> all difficult to see why reasonable people can differ about the meanings of >> various things out there. >> >> Anne >> >> 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 >> >> >> > --- 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
