nanog mailing list archives
Re: Major Labels v. Backbones
From: Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 22:58:32 -0400
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 10:03:37PM -0400, John Ferriby wrote:
A number of major music labels have joined forces and are seeking relief from backbone providers, see:
Ok here's a question, why are they sueing AT&T, CW, and UU? I see Listen4ever behind 4134 (China Telecom), who I only see buying transit through InterNAP. Wouldn't it be simpler for them to sue InterNAP? I guess it would sure be nice precedent, if they could make some big tier 1 providers do their bidding to filter whoever they want whenever they want. Might I suggest filtering the websites of the offending "major labels" as an appropriate retort? -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
Current thread:
- Major Labels v. Backbones John Ferriby (Aug 16)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 16)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones blitz (Aug 16)
- Dave Farber comments on Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Sean Donelan (Aug 16)
- Re: Dave Farber comments on Re: Major Labels v. Backbones senthil ayyasamy (Aug 17)
- Re: Dave Farber comments on Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Marshall Eubanks (Aug 19)
- RE: Dave Farber comments on Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Deepak Jain (Aug 19)
- Re: Dave Farber comments on Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Stephen Stuart (Aug 19)
- Re: Dave Farber comments on Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Tim Thorne (Aug 19)
- Re: Dave Farber comments on Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Joe Baptista (Aug 19)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 16)
- Re: Major Labels v. Backbones Ralph Doncaster (Aug 17)