It's not the first time that word appears on the bill, itspecifies that the publisher needs to "knowingly and intentionally..." do the deed. So there is no res

It's not the first time that word appears on the bill, itspecifies that the publisher needs to "knowingly and intentionally..." do the deed. So there is no responsibility created to actively discern (IANAL) traffic, but if you already have that info, you would be compelled to act upon it. Again IANAL, but this could create responsibilities to avoid estoppel, for example if you filter users from VPNs for purposes like reducing spam, then you receive the benefit of identifying VPNs, and you might be compelled to bear the responsibility of it. Another nuance is that the vpn identification might be provided by a 3rd party (see cloudflare) in which case the provider would not KNOW, but then again CF might bear the responsibility considering that they would be the distributors with knowledge of the VPN lists. I think the law plays out very sensibly.