> On Aug 5, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote:
>
> Patrick,
>
> You’re confusing the FCC’s definition of common carrier for telecom
> regulatory purposes, and the DMCA definition, which specifically grants ISPs
> protection from litigation through its Safe Harbor provision, as long as they
> operate as pure common carriers:
>
> “Section 512(a) provides a safe harbor from liability for ISPs, provided that
> they operate their networks within certain statutory bounds, generally
> requiring the transmission of third-party information without interference,
> modification, storage, or selection. [emphasis mine]
>
> http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v27/27HarvJLTech257.pdf
>
> -mel
Section 512(a) applies very specifically to the copyright infringement issue as
addressed in the DMCA. While I don't disagree that this law school paper,
written while Lovejoy was a law student, in 2013, could be read as if ISPs
were common carriers, they are not, and were not. Even if it were headed that
way, actions by the current FTC and administration rolled back net neutrality
efforts in 2017, four years after this student paper was published.
All that said, this is very arcane stuff, and ever-mutating, so it's not at all
difficult to see why reasonable people can differ about the meanings of various
things out there.
Anne
Anne P. Mitchell, Attorney at Law
CEO/President, Institute for Social Internet Public Policy
Dean of Cybersecurity & Cyberlaw, Lincoln Law School of San Jose
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant
GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Board of Directors, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
Member: California Bar Association
