Hacker News Reader

Comment by muzani | Hacker News Reader

Context of the illegal image matters too. I'd be very pissed if it was a common shock image like goatse or a dead body, but more understanding if it was child porn. Basically would it be permissible on reddit?

I do use namecheap and don't check my email every month, so that is quite worrying.

View on HN

What do you think would happen if MarkMonitor completely shut down Google.com, Microsoft.com, or Amazon.com because of a user submitted image hosted on one of their subdomains?

Obviously some images are more harmful and illegal than others, but Namecheap has absolutely no business acting as judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to something that in no way passes through any part of their infrastructure.

If they’re not hosting the DNS or web servers hosting the offending image then they should stand down. They took down Imgur for not deleting an image within I believe it was 2 hours of notice. Completely unprofessional.

I get the impression companies like Google, Facebook, and YouTube go through this all the time, and have a team ready to handle such moderation requests.

I'm not sure what legal rights or responsibilities the registrar has, though. Obviously someone is going through them because it works and it's probably easiest for them to just ignore a request if it's not their responsibility.

> Context of the illegal image matters too. I'd be very pissed if it was a common shock image like goatse or a dead body, but more understanding if it was child porn.

Why should content be a concern, or relevant, for a registrar?

If this was a CDN then I guess that this sort of meddling could be debatable, but DNS?

If I ran a business I would not allow customers that break the law. Would you?

Do internet service providers or apartment rentals or car rentals police your usage of their service?

So why would a glorified traffic signal be allowed to deny you service just because it disagrees with you?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com