Re: Remedies against ISPs

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:47:00 +0000, Sharky <spam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Marshall Rice wrote:
In message <47mabtFgic93U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sharky <spam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
writes

Marshall Rice wrote:




That's just the point. They're not.

The Judge clearly doesn't understand how Usenet works, though that's
hardly surprising as the author of what's currently the leading textbook
on Internet defamation doesn't either.

One of the Claimant's errors was in not making it clear that a newsgroup
posting is *not* like a telephone call or email in that it is merely
transmitted onwards by the ISP.

What happens is that a subscriber's posting is placed on the ISPs server
and then broadcast by it to all the world.

That is not mere transmission, but publication in every sense of the word.



But as far as I'm aware, nobody has been on Usenet for more than five
minutes posts to or reads from their own ISP usenet server, most ISP
servers are limited in their scope of groups held.

You are aware wrong.

Quite a large percentage of people on usenet use the servers provided
by their ISP.

Most users post via someone like the German server (individual.net) or
similar, and it is then propogated around the world.
I would be fairly certain that the original defendants would have posted
to the german server or similar.
It is there that it is published first (if only by microseconds) and may
or may not end up on a server belonging to the original ISP.
Susbsequent usenet servers are only mirroring the original post.

This fact is irrelevant.

Therefore , whilst the original ISP have been conduits to usenet, they
are not responsible for the original post - individual.net would need to
be informed who could then propogate a cancel request.

Anybody hosting the message becomes liable once they are informed of
the specific message, provided they have the means to delete it, and
do not take appropriate action "expeditiously".

And that was also made clear in the judgement.

But the judge accepted that this does not hold until they are
informed, and that being informed of some messages does not impose any
duty to monitor further postings.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Pobody's Nerfect!
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Are my posts getting through?
    ... Who used to be just an open, free to use server at a German ... Well, if you have some kind of Usenet service through your ISP, you'd ... I can't understand not maintaining Usenet access. ... it's cheaper in relative terms for a big ISP to provide Usenet ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)
  • Re: recomended reading? I did not write this message - (OFF TOPIC - Steve)
    ... Uploading on one ISP and downloading on another sure as heck does not ... Even if your ISP does not provide a news server, ... identity* across Usenet, the same few trolls will follow me across Usenet ...
    (rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc)
  • Re: microsoft newsgroup response time
    ... ISP's don't like UseNet. ... COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, ... This can slow down Usenet service even if you use a paid server. ... You've managed to explain one way the ISP is able to do this. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Usenet Marginalization
    ... ISP and no one's really sure what the liability is there. ... never sits on any company's server, ... course that would make customer demand for usenet shrink by another ... so they don't bother at all for usenet once they ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: Remedies against ISPs
    ... But as far as I'm aware, nobody has been on Usenet for more than five ... minutes posts to or reads from their own ISP usenet server, ... Susbsequent usenet servers are only mirroring the original post. ...
    (uk.legal)