[178509] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: What is lawful content? [was VZ...]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Richardson)
Fri Feb 27 23:34:26 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <B38BE47A-3C5A-4B49-9244-EFFADCFB8FB3@delong.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 20:33:51 -0800
From: Jim Richardson <weaselkeeper@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I am sure The Gibson guitar company thought the same thing about the EPA.
At least we can be sure that a TLA govt agency wouldn't be used to
harass an administration's political opponents, right?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 27, 2015, at 16:09 , Jim Richardson <weaselkeeper@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net> =
wrote:
>>> Again, well settled.
>>>
>>> It is where the end user is viewing the content _and_ where the content=
is served. If a CDN, then each node which serves the traffic must be in a =
place where it is legal. There are CDNs which do not serve all customers fr=
om all nodes for exactly this reason.
>>
>> Does this mean that viewing say, cartoons of mohammed, may or may not
>> be 'illegal' for me to do, and result in my ISP being forced to block
>> traffic, depending on what origin and route they take to get to me?
>>
>> Are we going to have the fedgov trying to enforce other country's
>> censorship laws on us?
>
>
> This is absurd.
>
> The source server is under the jurisdiction of the sovereigns in that loc=
ation. Any enforcement of their laws upon the source server is carried out =
at the source by them.
>
> The recipient client is under the jurisdictions of the sovereigns in that=
location. Any enforcement of their laws upon the recipient is carried out =
there by them.
>
> In the case of a US ISP, their local jurisdiction should (though I haven=
=E2=80=99t read the detailed rules yet) be pre-empted from content based in=
terference by the federal preemption rules and the applicability of Title I=
I. Federal law would still, however, apply, and so an ISP would not be allo=
wed to route traffic to/from a site which they have been notified through p=
roper due process is violating US law.
>
> Beyond the borders of the US, the FCC has little or no ability to enforce=
anything.
>
> Owen
>
