tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post7643490534648511269..comments2024-03-26T10:41:35.852+00:00Comments on The 1709 Blog: Cox on the back foot in claim by BMGMarie-Andree Weisshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17125973798789498436noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-87762116671828484892015-11-27T16:58:14.204+00:002015-11-27T16:58:14.204+00:00To answer the second point - its a problem between...To answer the second point - its a problem between Google and my own email address which I have tried to fix - we have all tried to fix - including using a gmail account, changing my settings, looking at firewalls etc etc. If I could fix it I would! Jeremy was sending my posts (and one of my fellow bloggers who has the same problem too) onwards manually, and we do hope to contiunue that. It is very frustrating. Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01868498334405853494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-84426340151636964792015-11-27T10:43:43.928+00:002015-11-27T10:43:43.928+00:00Ben, I've noticed looking at the blog website ...Ben, I've noticed looking at the blog website that there are a series of your recent posts that I've not received through the "automatically" emails each blogs to subscribers when they are posted; whereas I have received all of Jeremy and Eleanora's recent postings including Jeremy's farewell posting. Is there something that you are doing or not doing when you post your items that means they don't get picked up by the auto-email. Would be good not to miss any of your updates! Many thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-42439486206403376892015-11-25T23:04:07.019+00:002015-11-25T23:04:07.019+00:00A small correction: The Plaintiffs did not claim t...A small correction: The Plaintiffs did not claim that Cox was under a legal obligation to forward the notices sent to Cox. They merely claimed that Cox had lost the benefit of its "safe harbor" by failing to enforce a policy that calls for the termination of repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances. The Court agreed. Now the issue of underlying liability is to be tried. But query: Why would the ISPs have fought so hard for the "safe harbor" if they don't have any liability without it? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com