[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
tor
- Subject: tor
- From: ops.lists at gmail.com (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:22:53 +0530
- In-reply-to: <1E8B940C5E21014AB8BE70B975D40EDB016282F4@bert.HiberniaAtlantic.local>
- References: <m2k531l8oc.wl%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <1E8B940C5E21014AB8BE70B975D40EDB016282E9@bert.HiberniaAtlantic.local> <[email protected]> <1E8B940C5E21014AB8BE70B975D40EDB016282EF@bert.HiberniaAtlantic.local> <[email protected]> <1E8B940C5E21014AB8BE70B975D40EDB016282F4@bert.HiberniaAtlantic.local>
Rod - you wouldnt qualify as an ISP - or even a "provider of an
interactive computer service" to go by the language in 47 USC 230, by
simply running a TOR exit node.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 4:15 AM, Rod Beck<Rod.Beck at hiberniaatlantic.com> wrote:
> Richard,
>
> The question is how much ISPs should be responsible for the actions of their clients.
>
> My point is that is not obvious where you draw the line.
>
> I have yet to see anyone, including yourself, articulate a general principle (maybe it doesn't exist).
>
- Follow-Ups:
- tor
- From: adrian at creative.net.au (Adrian Chadd)
- References:
- tor
- From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
- tor
- From: ras at e-gerbil.net (Richard A Steenbergen)
- tor
- From: Rod.Beck at hiberniaatlantic.com (Rod Beck)
- tor
- From: ras at e-gerbil.net (Richard A Steenbergen)
- tor
- From: Rod.Beck at hiberniaatlantic.com (Rod Beck)
- tor
- From: ras at e-gerbil.net (Richard A Steenbergen)
- tor
- From: Rod.Beck at hiberniaatlantic.com (Rod Beck)
- Prev by Date:
tor
- Next by Date:
tor
- Previous by thread:
tor
- Next by thread:
tor
- Index(es):