how-to block ads
|reply to r81984 |
Re: Shame on the ISP's
said by r81984:The distinction isn't important in this context. Their role also wasn't web hosting, they were providing colocation services for the websites in question. They did nothing but provide space, power, and connectivity for the servers hosting those websites.
You seem to keep confusing web hosting with
transmitting, routing, or providing connections (including temp storage during transmission)
said by r81984:An ISP is only provided immunity if they have not been informed of a violation. Basically you can't be implicated for material in violation going over your wires if you haven't been been given the opportunity to rectify the situation.
An ISP is 100% protected from lawsuits from any customer that transmits or receives copyrighted material. Forwarding letters is not required and has nothing to do with that protection. Forwarding letters is required if the ISP is "hosting" content in terms of a web server.
said by r81984:The ISP is only granted immunity until they are informed of the violation. (They can't be prosecuted for violations they are not informed about) After they've been informed, as this court ruling shows, they MUST take action or they become complicit in the violation.
The law does not require an ISP to forward letters for protection and the customers are not paying for that activity.
r81984Fair and BalancedPremiumReviews:
said by espaeth:Not according to your link which say the ISP is protected unless they do not comply with the court order.
The ISP is only granted immunity until they are informed of the violation. (They can't be prosecuted for violations they are not informed about) After they've been informed, as this court ruling shows, they MUST take action or they become complicit in the violation.
said by yourlink :Your link clearly states that ISP are protected from customers transmitting and receiving copyright data. An ISP is under no obligation to forward any letters for any protection. They are already 100% protected.
Section 512(j) describes the forms of injunctive (i.e. court order) relief available to copyright holders. Even though OSPs have immunity from monetary damages under Section 512, they may be compelled by copyright holders, in appropriate situations, to stop providing access to infringing material or to terminate the account of a particular infringer.
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.