3 ms·
As if this is even a consideration in the law. They are clueless to whatever an internet protocol is. Effectively, if it uses the "internet" and you interface
by wiredpancake 1y ago
As if this is even a consideration in the law.
They are clueless to whatever an internet protocol is. Effectively, if it uses the "internet" and you interface with it from a device, it is subject to the ruling.
- trhway 1y agoAnd if i were a lawyer i'd use the legal system - specifically i'd start by challenging OSA on the undue burden grounds for say BitTorrent - bringing in some experts, etc.. If not successful - such ruling would effectively prohibit all unauthenticated network activity - would make the cost of OSA clear to the public. If successful, i'd show that the same content OSA worried about - like p.rn - is widely available on BitTorrent, and thus having limitations for HTTP while not for BitTorrent is capricious or something like this.
- wpm 1y agoYou're allowed to say porn