4 ms·

We can read the brief from the petitioners for the (apparently winning) response to this on p 38 of https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca6.151

by abduhl 2y ago

We can read the brief from the petitioners for the (apparently winning) response to this on p 38 of https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca6.151470/gov.uscourts.ca6.151470.54.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca6.151... “That exception focuses on inward-facing controls. But ISPs do not use DNS or caching to ‘manage, control, or operate’ their own purported ‘telecommunications system’ or ‘telecommunications service.’ Both DNS and caching provide a user-facing functionality.”

vel0city 2y ago
Petitioners can write whatever they want to write. They can write 2+2=22 and I guess you'd believe it. What a dumb argument to parrot. Do you choose your ISP based on how good their DNS services are? No? Doesn't seem like DNS is the thing people are signing up for but simply a way for the service to function. Oh boy, I can't wait to get home to hop on my Comcast service so I can go query their DNS! It's what the family does on a Thursday evening. So riveting! In the end DNS isn't really the information people care about and actually largely is used for managing telecommunications service.
- abduhl 2y ago
  I can see that you are extremely emotionally invested in this decision for some reason, but there’s no need to resort to these type of hysterical personal attacks. I have no horse in this race, I am just providing the apparently persuasive (and winning) counter to your argument.