anomus
@mindspring.com
| reply to Xtract
Re: IRC trading
You seem to have missed the point. Right this very minute, the **aa's are indeed holding the ISPs accountable for the P2P traffic that is infringing. That is why the ISPs send the users those violation leters that are poping up all over threatening disconection. In doing so, the ISPs are then released from legal liability from the activity there system perpetuates. If a private user sets up a proxy service and is caught ferrying illegal material, they are compelled to threaten disconnection and divulge idetification or face legal penalties. Only an off shore buisness location out of the reach of world law hostile to fileshareing can get away with proxy serving for the time being. |
|
Xtract
join:2003-04-25
Etheria
| ISP's weren't held responsible for the data that went through them, but legislation made them responsible for turning over the information regarding the customer that was.
What if they didn't have that information? That barrier hasn't seemed to be crossed yet. The ISP would only legally be responsible for REFUSING to give information.
You can't subpoena for something that doesn't exist. I can completely understand where you're coming from. I really can, but perhaps its just my curiosity that is causing me to wonder otherwise. |
|
grjones
join:2001-12-01
Seattle, WA
|  reply to anomus
["Only an off shore buisness location out of the reach of world law hostile to fileshareing can get away with proxy serving for the time being."]
Which is why I know people who use a n offshore opeation called EarthStation5, which I have looked at and the provide an intersting alternative that appears to be able to thwart the RIAA using DMCA to crack donw on their users. |
|
