[117235] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ruling: liability for providers who don't act on clients' illegal
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gadi Evron)
Mon Sep 7 13:06:16 2009
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 19:59:42 +0300
From: Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org>
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <4AA53B92.90806@linuxbox.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Gadi Evron wrote:
> Jury Exacts $32M Penalty From ISPs For Supporting Criminal Websites
> http://darkreading.com/securityservices/security/cybercrime/showArticle.jhtml
>
Corrected URL:
http://darkreading.com/securityservices/security/cybercrime/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=5P4BO3EZ4TBL3QE1GHPSKH4ATMY32JVN?articleID=219501314
> 'Landmark case' indicates that ISPs may be held liable if they know
> about criminal activity on their customers' Websites and fail to act
>
> A federal jury in California this week levied a total of $32 million in
> damages from two Internet service providers that knowingly supported
> Websites that were running illegal operations.
>
> In a lawsuit brought by fashion company Louis Vuitton, a jury ruled that
> two ISPs -- Akanoc Solutions and Managed Solutions Group -- knew about
> counterfeit Vuitton goods that were being sold on their customers'
> sites, but didn't act quickly to pull the plug on those sites. The
> decision was first reported on Tuesday.
>
> The ruling has been called a landmark decision by some legal experts,
> who note that ISPs historically have been protected by the Digital
> Millennium Copyright Act, which limits service providers' liability for
> criminal actions that take place on their networks.
>
>
