>What would you have them do instead? They're bound under OCILLA and the DMCA in general to act in a certain way. Any other host on the Internet will, if they a

>What would you have them do instead? They're bound under OCILLA and the DMCA in general to act in a certain way. Any other host on the Internet will, if they are interested in remaining in business, act exactly as ServerBeach did. No, not EVERY host. FusionStorm for example actually read and comprehend DMCA claims, to narrow down their scope. You DO NOT turn off a customer of this size WITHOUT GETTING ON THE PHONE with them FIRST. I hope this will teach ServerBeach a lesson. However, as I said in another comment, the overall landscape here is deteriorating is far beyond ServerBeach's control: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4657833 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4657833 PS. I should also add here that the revenues of a company that pays $70,000 for hosting annually could well be above $2m/yr, and such company could be capable of raising serious legal issues with their hosting company.