Four more large Internet service providers told the US Supreme Court this week that ISPs shouldn’t be forced to aggressively police copyright infringement on broadband networks.

While the ISPs worry about financial liability from lawsuits filed by major record labels and other copyright holders, they also argue that mass terminations of Internet users accused of piracy “would harm innocent people by depriving households, schools, hospitals, and businesses of Internet access.” The legal question presented by the case “is exceptionally important to the future of the Internet,” they wrote in a brief filed with the Supreme Court on Monday.

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    imagine getting banned from the one monopoly ISP available to you in your entire city. what do you do after that? sell your house?

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s insane that people (okay, mostly corporations) try to argue internet access is not a utility. What happens then? Does your home value decrease? Or does the next purchaser have to petition the ISP to convince them they are a different, non-infringing customer and hope they reverse the ban??

      • nutsack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I’m guessing it would be tied to your name. the new tenants would have service, but you might have to move to a different state or something.