

Don’t cast CloudFlare as copyright/trademark enforcer - jgrahamc
http://www.rstreet.org/2015/06/24/dont-cast-cloudflare-as-copyrighttrademark-enforcer/

======
bediger4000
_CloudFlare felt compelled, rightfully, to argue that the implications of the
order would burden not only CloudFlare, but also any infrastructure service
provider (think AT &T or Comcast) to act as an intellectual-property
enforcer._

But that's exactly what will happen. The "gatekeeper" industries, movies,
records/CDs, book publishers, newspapers. They make monopoly rents off of
state-guaranteed monopolies. They've already got approved "limited"
monopolies, so it's in their best interests to get someone else to pay to
enforce it, maybe taxpayers, maybe CloudFlare or any other infrastructure
provider.

I think there's other factions in politics that would like to stuff the
Internet Genie back in it's lamp. They will latch on to "intellectual
property" as a way to keep people from getting fast information about
political manuvering, logrolling, dealmaking, etc.

And to think that in 1995, I was worried that Bill Gates' Microsoft would
subsume all programming in-house, release proprietary internetworking
protocols that distinguished plainly between a "server" and "client", and sell
both docs on MSCP/MSIP and server licenses at a high cost. Ha ha. It is to
laugh.

