Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> 	I don't like what the ISP's may be planning, but I can't find a good
> legal or constitutional argument against it

Look under "common carrier". If you start filtering, then you're responsible 
for what you pass on. If you decide to filter bittorrent because it might be 
copyright violation, you become responsible for that violation. If you 
filter content but don't block child porn,  you become responsible for 
distributing child porn if you miss any. This is how the phone company 
avoids being convicted of conspiracy when two drug dealers make a deal over 
the phone.

Freedom from such responsibility (in the US at least) comes with some rules, 
like being required to offer everyone the same service for the same price, 
and the responsibility *not* to filter things.

> 	It's like if I own a store with a bulletin board. I have the right to
> dictate what goes on there and what doesn't. I could arbitrarily say
> that you can post anything you want to sell on it, but no postings
> regarding private tutoring are allowed.

Yes. But then if someone posts up naked children, you are *required* to take 
it down, on the grounds that you're policing the content to start with.

This is how google gets away with letting you search illegal content.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message