> The judgment talks about Cloudflare's services in terms of caching, speed, security and so on, but seems to ignore the vital service that Cloudflare provide t

> The judgment talks about Cloudflare's services in terms of caching, speed, security and so on, but seems to ignore the vital service that Cloudflare provide to shady sites - anonymity. They aren’t really anonymous - CF knows who they are. > This victory adds to the impression that Cloudflare is a safe front to present content that would be taken down if hosted directly. Not really, in the article it says that CF will notify the hosting provider of the infringing material.