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-to-make-the-internet-a-better-place-it-failed Tony Patti [SW_logo_HighRes]<http://www.swalter.com/> CIO t: (215) 867-8401 f: (215) 268-7184 e: t...@swalter.com<mailto:t...@swalter.com> w: www.swalter.com<http://www.swalter.com/> -----Original Message----- From: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> On Behalf Of Mel Beckman Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 11:36 PM To: John Levine <jo...@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 > <jo...@iecc.com<mailto:jo...@iecc.com>> wrote: > > In article > <6956e76b-e6b7-409f-a636-c7607bfd8...@beckman.org<mailto:6956e76b-e6b7-409f-a636-c7607bfd8...@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. > >
