I hate the Internet and the people who own it

[AgendaPoster]

I really wish people would stop suggesting "just heckin' sue or something bro" as if they have any fucking idea.

All I was trying to say is that you are being defamed, I am not suggesting it would be cheap or easy.
Is there any chance some 1A obsessed org or lawyer would do it for free? That's the last thing I will say, I see you're in a bad mood.

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

Is there a scenario where Null wins a lawsuit, but HE just facetanks the fines? They decide it's worth a rounding error of a grand a day or whatever to stop KF from doing a heckin' transphobia?

 

[Illuminati Order Official]

Is there a scenario where Null wins a lawsuit, but HE just facetanks the fines?

Judging by Melinda Scott's lawsuit, it's a matter of costs of the proceedings - everything a lawyer writes comes with a price tag. Melinda is a retard from Bumfuck, Nowhere and she managed to cause some financial problems - imagine what a big company with competent lawyers could do.

 

[Null]

Is there a scenario where Null wins a lawsuit, but HE just facetanks the fines? They decide it's worth a rounding error of a grand a day or whatever to stop KF from doing a heckin' transphobia?

generally speaking if the court orders you to do something and you don't the fines will be something like "x thousand dollars every day the service is not restored". If they want to pay me $x,000 a day that's fine too.

 

[Barry McKockner]

generally speaking if the court orders you to do something and you don't the fines will be something like "x thousand dollars every day the service is not restored". If they want to pay me $x,000 a day that's fine too.

This. If you know how something like a construction contract works, if you extend past the approved period of performance (project takes longer than agreed), liquidated damages start to be accrued where the contractor OWES $X/day for being late. The law uses something similar because of the accruing damages.

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

Fair enough.

 

[siegemeister675]

Lawsuits are a $75,000 commitment minimum but I am completely willing to bet everything I have on this. I am in the right and the Internet will not go quietly into that sweet goodnight. Whatever I do will be surgical.

I really wish people would stop suggesting "just heckin' sue or something bro" as if they have any fucking idea.

We don't deserve you null. Thank you for all that you do.

 

[Rent Tin]

Based and Joshpilled, let's go all in on Total HE Defeat.

 

[anustart76]

Lawsuits are a $75,000 commitment minimum but I am completely willing to bet everything I have on this. I am in the right and the Internet will not go quietly into that sweet goodnight. Whatever I do will be surgical.

I really wish people would stop suggesting "just heckin' sue or something bro" as if they have any fucking idea.

If there is a lawsuit, will there be a separate way to help fund it? Or just stick to the existing methods?

 

[Tetragrammaton]

its weird to me how hurricane electric of all things has become so corrupt that they actually believe they have a legal right to block a website from accessing the internet simply because they say mean things sometimes. it really is just insane to think about but i am still hopeful for the future. this whole thing is a massive overreach in power and if they wanna claim criminal harassment they need to provide proof other than a rigged wikipedia page.

 

[Prince Vegeta]

The language in the reply suggests to me no legal or regulatory department looked at it and thus the complaint has not left the customer service department (and reached the management layer).

 

[JoshPlz]

Hurricane Electric has responded. In summary, their points are two-fold:

1. The Kiwi Farms is criminal harassment and thus they may legally block it.
2. They didn't actually block it, they just refuse to provide it transit.

My response is three-fold.

1. An Internet forum cannot be guilty of criminal harassment. These ISP clauses about harassment concern end-users using outbound Internet connection to harm a single person, perhaps across multiple sites. The Kiwi Farms does not make unsolicited outbound connections and thereby cannot offend anyone who does not deliberately seek out and connect to the Kiwi Farms to read the material of their own volition.

2. The verb used by the Hurricane Electric routers to block the Kiwi Farms subnet is literally "deny". They have blocked my network and a lawful Internet service. To claim otherwise is intellectually dishonest and they know it.

3. The Washington State law does not even need HE to block the Kiwi Farms. Section 1 (2)(b) says:
"[ISPs] may not: Impair or degrade lawful internet traffic on the basis of internet content, application, or service, or use of a nonharmful device, subject to reasonable network management"

So they don't even need to "block" the Kiwi Farms. Connectivity to my network has been "impaired or degraded" by 100%. They are in the wrong regardless.

—

There is no legitimate reason for the largest ISP in the world to act as a government censorship body. Just restore the network and the madness will be over. You know it is objectively the only correct, legal, and moral action to take.

Very weak response from HE. They are just hoping for their bullshit accusations to be taken as truth, without anyone actually looking into it.
It has worked perfectly for other providers so far, but there was no net neutrality state law involved then.

 

[unexpected onions]

Gee, I wonder who it could be.

Spoiler

 

[Kosher Salt]

1. The Kiwi Farms is criminal harassment and thus they may legally block it.

The Kiwi Farms is a legal website and if they have a court order saying otherwise and ordering them to legally block it, they should produce it.

 

[Green Pocket]

and that they're not blocking the packets, they can still reach their destination over HE's network so long as the destination isn't a direct HE customer

Is this actually true? I thought the "deny" rule was blocking 1776 Solutions' IPv6 network entirely, as the only route to it at the time was via HE.

 

[JoshPlz]

Is this actually true? I thought the "deny" rule was blocking 1776 Solutions' IPv6 network entirely, as the only route to it at the time was via HE.

They are full of shit. If I understand it correctly, IncogNET is at least one layer of separation away from being a direct customer of HE.
Even if it was true, blocking direct customers from accessing KF is still violating the state law.

 

[Blaster]

if they wanna claim criminal harassment they need to provide proof other than a rigged wikipedia page.

This is probably a stupid question, and intensely but bear with me:

1. Presumably the Attornery General will have to reply that KiwiFarms has not been found guilty of any crimes
2. Presumably this statement would be publicly available information
3. The Washington state Attorney General is a pretty fucking reputable source

Assuming these 3 points are true, could the AGO's response be creatively weaponized in the KF PR war?
Now I would assume trannies have a strangle hold on Wikipedia so they'll likely not include it in the KF article, but it would at least be fun to try.
That said, what about journalists? They may feel compelled to include it in all past and future articles as a way to mitigate liability with regards to libel accusations. Additionally, if you crippled enough of their articles you'd actually be harming Wikipedia's "sources".

Rate me , but a man can dream of globohomo suffering a minor act of humiliation, can't he?

 

[siegemeister675]

This is probably a stupid question, and intensely but bear with me:

1. Presumably the Attornery General will have to reply that KiwiFarms has not been found guilty of any crimes
2. Presumably this statement would be publicly available information
3. The Washington state Attorney General is a pretty fucking reputable source

Assuming these 3 points are true, could the AGO's response be creatively weaponized in the KF PR war?
Now I would assume trannies have a strangle hold on Wikipedia so they'll likely not include it in the KF article, but it would at least be fun to try. That said, what about in response to journalists? They may feel compelled to include it in all past and future articles as a way to mitigate liability with regards to Libel accusations.

Rate me optimistic, but a man can dream of globohomo suffering a minor act of humiliation, can't he?

Theoretically this could be cited on Wikipedia lol although the jannies would lose their fucking minds over it

 

[mindlessobserver]

Which government granted Hurricane Electric the authority to determine what constitutes "Criminality" anyway? Last I checked, only the State and its elected/appointed agents had the authority to punish "criminal" behavior.

Setting aside the fact that this forum is not breaking any laws, I already don't like the actual state agents with badges and guns running around enforcing bullshit laws. I REALLY don't like a nebulous faceless corporation answerable to no-one doing it.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

3. The Washington state Attorney General is a pretty fucking reputable source

Assuming these 3 points are true, could the AGO's response be creatively weaponized in the KF PR war?
Now I would assume trannies have a strangle hold on Wikipedia so they'll likely not include it in the KF article, but it would at least be fun to try.

Theoretically this could be cited on Wikipedia lol although the jannies would lose their fucking minds over it

I'm 99% sure they'd consider this "independent research" or "primary source" both of which are banned.