[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IP: ISP not liable for customer's messages

Mr. Wombat writes:

> > As I recall, the individual was trying to sell a pornographic video
> > featuring the woman's 11 year old son, which is another thing entirely.

> Not really. If the service providor is to be held accountable for what 
> its members post/say/etc., they would have to monitor *all* traffic in 
> order to police their members. In addition, even if the providor *were* 
> monitoring, they can only be reactive - do you expect them to monitor and 
> censor all traffic before releasing it?

I was merely correcting a factual error in the prior post. 

Clearly, a parent is likely to feel more outrage towards AOL if
pornographic videos of their 11 year old son are being openly sold online
by the child's victimizer, than if some random person tries to sell said
11 year old a piece of mainstream erotica. 

Pointing out why this parent is so bent out of shape over this is not the
moral equivalent of suggesting that servuce providers should be held
accountable for content they do not originate, which I do not support. 

Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"