Darren New wrote:
> 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

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality_in_the_United_States

"Cable modem Internet access has always been categorized under U.S. law
as an information service, and not a telecommunications service, and
thus has not been subject to common carrier regulations"

Citation not provided, and in any case, WINAL.


>>     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.

	I'm not 100% sure. I would think I'm required to take it down only if
notified of its presence. IOW, I don't think there's any law that states
that I _have_ to actively monitor what goes on on my Web site. Not sure,
though.

-- 
If a pig lost it's voice, would it become disgruntled?


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message