nanog mailing list archives
Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set
From: William Herrin <herrin-nanog () dirtside com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:47:53 -0400
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Jack Bates<jbates () brightok net> wrote:
"The Akanoc Defendants’ specific business model of providing unmanaged server capacity to web hosting resellers does not exempt them from taking active steps to effectively prevent infringing activity upon notification from an intellectual property rights owner. " I consider that the more important statement in the article. The "upon notification" being the largest issue. Don't know if DMCA covers anything outside the scope of copyright, but I think it's been generally accepted that ignoring reports of infringement can bring about liability.
Does anyone have a link to the decision? If you go to http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/01/web_host_faces.htm and click on "Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. Akanoc Solutions, Inc." you can get an earlier decision regarding Akanoc's motion for summary judgement in the case. Reading between the lines, it sounds like Akanoc had a customer who put a server in their facility. This customer then hosted a bunch of sites including the ones that infringed. On receiving a complaint, Akanoc contacted the customer and more or less said, kill this website or we unplug your server. Then the customer shuffled the site around to another of his servers. Have a look at pages 10 through 12. Page 12 lines 11-13, it reads to me like the judge made a serious error trying to understand the difference between a web site and an IP address. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin () dirtside com bill () herrin us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Current thread:
- Beware: a very bad precedent set nanog (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Jack Bates (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Mark Andrews (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Bret Clark (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Robin Rodriguez (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Peter Hicks (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Mark Andrews (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set William Herrin (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set jamie (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Jack Bates (Aug 31)
- RE: Beware: a very bad precedent set Greg Whynott (Aug 31)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set William Pitcock (Aug 31)
- Re: Beware: a very bad precedent set Christopher Morrow (Aug 31)