3 ms·
They never had a common carrier argument that held water. Common Carrier is a legal term that refers to regulation under Title II of the Telecommunications Act
by matt4077 9y ago
They never had a common carrier argument that held water.
Common Carrier is a legal term that refers to regulation under Title II of the Telecommunications Act. It grants the FCC the ability to classify certain communication companies as common carriers. That status can only be acquired by FCC action, not implicitly by following any standard set of rules.
The argument that taking action once creates a liability to police all content you're serving stems from an outdated court case.
The Communications Decency Act of 1996(!) specifically addressed the issue:
[..] Through the so-called Good Samaritan provision, [Section 230] also protects ISPs from liability for restricting access to certain material or giving others the technical means to restrict access to that material.
- jacquesm 9y ago> They never had a common carrier argument that held water. Agreed, they're not a phone company to begin with. But they did try to use that argument and they definitely did not help themselves. A better argument would have been to claim they don't have the technical capability, that might have bought them some time but then too they should not have shown first that they do have that capability. All in all a less than stellar performance.
- mr_toad 9y agoI can’t see how that argument would hold water. As a DNS provider, removing DNS records is clearly something they are capable of, regardless of whether they have demonstrated that ability.
- jacquesm 9y agoMe neither, it was a bs argument to begin with. But you can see how their reasoning went from "If ISPs can be common carriers why couldn't a CDN be a common carrier?". That said I can see the case for domain registrars and the Tor network long before I can see one for a CDN.