People don't want to resolve issues. They want to argue and be correct.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mu via NANOG" <[email protected]> To: "North American Network Operators Group" <[email protected]> Cc: "John Levine" <[email protected]>, "Mu" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2025 2:51:33 PM Subject: Re: Amazon AWS cloudfront WAF block On Thursday, May 29th, 2025 at 3:35 PM, John Levine via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote: > It appears that William Herrin via NANOG [email protected] said: > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 10:57 AM Andrew Kirch [email protected] wrote: > > > > > (A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to > > > or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be > > > obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, > > > or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is > > > constitutionally protected > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > The key phrase here is "taken in good faith." After I've notified you > > of an error, your action stops being good faith. > > > Uh, no. I have no duty to believe what you claim. > > Having looked at a lot of case law I can tell you that the only case where a > court did not find good faith was a strange one where one anti-malware service > listed another (for what looked like good reasons) and a court assumed that > since they were direct competitors it wasn't good faith. Other than that, if I > think your traffic is objectionable, I can reject it. > > See > https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2024/06/this-case-keeps-wrecking-internet-law-enigma-v-malwarebytes.htm > > In practice, threatening to sue Amazon is a dumb thing to do because they have > far more lawyers and experience and money than you do. This is obviously a > screwup and figuring out who to ask nicely is far more likely to work than > sending threats you can't actually carry out. > > R's, > John > > PS: Wasn't the original question from someone in South Africa? I have no idea > what their law is like, or if Amazon even has enough presence there to sue. > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/QGOVMLWJ36MZ3V5PZAZK3DH3PQKBRN5W/ Respectfully, is anyone here an actual lawyer giving legal advice? If not, can we maybe just suggest that everyone consults with their own lawyers about what actions they do or do not want to take? Obviously the original comment about sending a legal letter was made out of frustration because reaching an actual human at some of these megacorps is often like pulling teeth. I don't blame them for being frustrated. With that said, I cannot fathom how citing some cases and section 230 will help the original poster get a hold of someone at Amazon and/or resolve their issue. -mu _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/WQOPS73CIQFM725J4N3BW44T6KCQPQ72/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZAVRAFDDCWBYIRGFS4ZMIEL6UIYGKR6F/
