Lee Howard lee at asgard.org
Thu Oct 19 15:49:49 CST 2017


On 10/17/17, 5:33 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Christopher Morrow"
<nanog-bounces at nanog.org on behalf of morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

>you know, the Sci-Hub folk could fix this themselves... with some
>authentication requirements... and probably by just unplugging from the

"Sci-Hub’s founder, has previously told The Scientist the site plans to
ignore the lawsuit.” How would Sci-Hub consider this a “fix”?

What enforcement mechanism would the Court have against Sci-Hub?

The idea of making third parties (ISPs) incur costs (updating ACLs or
poisoning DNS) to enforce the order is pretty bad, and doesn’t stop Tor
access. Sorry I didn’t have a chance to file an amicus before the ruling


>On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Robert Mathews (OSIA)
><mathews at hawaii.edu>
>> Judge Recommends Ruling to Block Internet Access to Sci-Hub
>> The American Chemical Society seeks a broad order that includes millions
>> of dollars in damages and demands action from Internet service providers
>> and search engines.
>> By Diana Kwon | October 4, 2017
>> http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/50563/
>> title/Judge-Recommends-Ruling-to-Block-Internet-Access-to-Sci-Hub/
>> http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/50361/
>> title/Publishers--Legal-Action-Advances-Against-Sci-Hub/

More information about the NANOG mailing list