Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
ISP's certainly aren't responsible for people who break the law using their service, but I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with them assisting to uphold the law.
|
Sure. They should be required to follow the instructions of any legal court order.
The ability to tag people "lawbreakers" should not be handed over to corporations.
(Will they be shutting down access to YouTube? To Google, which people use to find copyrighted materials to download?)
If there's copyright infringement going on (which I'm not questioning), there are venues to prosecute or sue about it. If those aren't sufficient to protect the victims, improve them. We don't grant assault victims the right to handcuff people who they think might assault them in the future--not even if they've assaulted that person in the past.
Shutting down someone's internet access should require a court order, which should require legally-submitted evidence at the level that's required for a search warrant. If the courts can't handle that level of activity--that says the "crime" has become so common that most people aren't interested in stopping it. When the majority of the public isn't interested in enforcement, it's time to reconsider the laws.
Doesn't mean throw them out. In the US, civil rights laws often go against the will of the majority. But it's definitely worth considering who and what the laws protect, considering how much money has to be spent enforcing them.