本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Re:Why waste the time? (Score:5, Interesting)
by lynx_user_abroad (323975) on Wednesday June 30, @11:40AM (#9571456)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Monday January 13, @04:51PM)
Telcos aren't responsible for people who discuss illegal activities. How would an ISP?
Because (in the US at least) ISP are not defined by the law to be Common Carriers.
A Common Carrier is required to carry whatever content is provided on a non-discriminatory basis. That means they don't get to drop something just because they don't like it (as ISP's routinely do with SPAM and such). But because they have to carry it (even if it may be illegal) they can't be held responsible for doing so.
This ruling could be read as a move toward common carrier-like status for ISP's. That could be good for people who want to pass MP3's around, bad for people who want SPAMers to not be able to fill their inbox with crud.
However, if the ruling had gone the other way, we might well have seen ISP's get a certified right to block SPAM, MP3's, and anything else they didn't like, including HTTP requests to competing search engines, and VoIP packets where the ISP isn't getting a cut of the call toll.
It's an interesting ruling, but the roulette wheel is still spinning, and the ball is still bouncing.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
by lynx_user_abroad (323975) on Wednesday June 30, @11:40AM (#9571456)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Monday January 13, @04:51PM)
Telcos aren't responsible for people who discuss illegal activities. How would an ISP?
Because (in the US at least) ISP are not defined by the law to be Common Carriers.
A Common Carrier is required to carry whatever content is provided on a non-discriminatory basis. That means they don't get to drop something just because they don't like it (as ISP's routinely do with SPAM and such). But because they have to carry it (even if it may be illegal) they can't be held responsible for doing so.
This ruling could be read as a move toward common carrier-like status for ISP's. That could be good for people who want to pass MP3's around, bad for people who want SPAMers to not be able to fill their inbox with crud.
However, if the ruling had gone the other way, we might well have seen ISP's get a certified right to block SPAM, MP3's, and anything else they didn't like, including HTTP requests to competing search engines, and VoIP packets where the ISP isn't getting a cut of the call toll.
It's an interesting ruling, but the roulette wheel is still spinning, and the ball is still bouncing.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net