dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed
« RIAAextortion »
This is a sub-selection from Shame on the ISP's

Digital Plumber
Minneapolis, MN
·Vitelity VOIP

1 edit
reply to r81984

Re: Shame on the ISP's

said by r81984:

If you can't read the words in your own link and read the law then please stop posting.
Really you are arguing against your own link to the law, not me. This is pretty sad.

What's sad is that you took the time to read that link, and didn't read section (c) of the same law and see why Managed Solutions Group & Akanoc lost the case. They owned none of the servers in question, had no control over what content was on the servers -- they simply provided space, power and network.

(c) Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users.—
(1) In general.— A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other equitable relief, for infringement of copyright by reason of the storage at the direction of a user of material that resides on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider, if the service provider—
(i) does not have actual knowledge that the material or an activity using the material on the system or network is infringing;
(ii) in the absence of such actual knowledge, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent; or
(iii) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material;
(B) does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity; and
(C) upon notification of claimed infringement as described in paragraph (3), responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity.
There is a word that describes the folks who made the same argument you did that simply being a transit provider gives them blanket immunity: guilty. It's a misunderstanding of what a transit provider is in the context of the law, which proved costly in the Managed / AKANoc case.

The transit network provider clause in section (a) only applies to true transit networks like Level(3), GlobalCrossing, etc. Network providers that serve other networks, where the carrier has no way of knowing the end user of an IP because they don't own the network responsible for being the source of the infringing material.

Fair and Balanced
Katy, TX

1 recommendation

This is really sad.
You keep confusing web hosting with
transmitting, routing, or providing connections (including temp storage during transmission)

(a) Transitory Digital Network Communications.
Section A covers and ISP from all liability - for "transmitting, routing, or providing connections "

(c) Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users
Section C covers "for infringement of copyright by reason of the storage"
Section C clearly states "Residing", not "transmitting, routing, or providing connections".

If a users places content on an ISPs network somewhere like in remote email, web hosting, backup space, file servers the ISP needs to forward a takedown letter for protection as stated in section C.
If an ISP just provides a connection from the customer's network to the internet and transmits and receives the customers content they are 100% protected as stated in section A.

The words are pretty clear and distinct, I do not understand what is so damn confusing about this.
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.