I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
meeting the following criteria:

a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
customer still remains the owner of the domain

b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
permission

c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
these)

d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
decide to make payment for the renewal

e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP

f) is not fly-by-night

Many thanks!

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 at 06:55:16,  wrote in uk.net.providers  (Reference: 
)


>I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
>because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
>the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
>process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.


Look at Godfrey v Demon to see how futile is that hope. Godfrey did take 
it to law, Demon fought and could not afford to go beyond the High Court 
- by which time they were hundreds of thousands of pounds down the 
drain. The result is an indeterminate situation, since no judgement was 
ever issued. As a result, no lawyer could responsibly give advice other 
than take it down in the face of a complaint. I know of one case where 
the customer objected that the ISP was acting as judge and jury. That 
was not fair, it is precisely because they are not the judge that they 
must take the safe route in view of the absence of any comment by a 
judge (juries usually have no say in this).

The provider may be in the right but it could cost them their business 
to try and establish that. However much they might want to keep you 
happy, they will sacrifice you to stay in business. (After all, the 
result of anything else would be you unhappy because the thing was taken 
down when the business collapsed).
-- 
John Underwood
Do not change the Reply-To: address - it will work for at least 30 days.
After that visit <http://theunderwoods.org.uk/contact.html> for a
current contact address. Do not write to the From: address.

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no problem if a host's policy is to ban
>these)

If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
should read http://abuse.dreamhost.com/ carefully before signing up.

>d) does NOT require "automatic debiting" of a customer's bank account
>when it is time to renew a contract, i.e. it is up to the customer to
>decide to make payment for the renewal
>
>e) provides proper email facilities, i.e. POP
>
>f) is not fly-by-night

Again, Dreamhost meets all three of these requirements.

Mark
-- 
http://www.MotorwayServices.info - read and share comments and opinons
"And when you play you feel all right"

On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, Mark Goodge 
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan...@yahoo.co.uk put finger
> to keyboard and typed:

> If you are expecting a webhost to not enforce it's own AUP except on
> the basis of a court order, then you're unlikely to find any reputable
> supplier which will meet your requirements. So you need to find a host
> where your proposed use of the site is not a potential breach of their
> AUP, even if you think it's acceptable (ie, just because you're not
> going to spam doesn't mean that it will not fall foul of some other
> clause in the AUP). In particular, if you intend to distribute
> copyright material that belongs to someone else, then your chance of
> finding a reputable web host based in the US that will not take action
> on the basis of a legitimate DMCA complaint is pretty slim. If you do
> consider Dreamhost on the basis of my reccomendation, therefore, you
> should readhttp://abuse.dreamhost.com/carefully before signing up.

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. Your AUP point is taken.

I'm not planning to post up _any_ stuff written by anyone else, or
allow
others to, or anything like that. What I might do is say some things
about
people that cause them to "try it on" with the webhost. E.g. demanding
that the site be taken down, because they say it defames them.
I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.

I've found some ISPs that are good on this, but they fall down on one
or
more of the other points, usually automatic renewal.

Your info is much appreciated. I like the Dreamhost AUP a lot,
including what they say here:

http://abuse.dreamhost.com/libel

Cheers,

Michael

On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 at 06:55:16,  wrote in uk.net.providers  (Reference: 
)


>I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
>because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
>the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
>process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.


Look at Godfrey v Demon to see how futile is that hope. Godfrey did take 
it to law, Demon fought and could not afford to go beyond the High Court 
- by which time they were hundreds of thousands of pounds down the 
drain. The result is an indeterminate situation, since no judgement was 
ever issued. As a result, no lawyer could responsibly give advice other 
than take it down in the face of a complaint. I know of one case where 
the customer objected that the ISP was acting as judge and jury. That 
was not fair, it is precisely because they are not the judge that they 
must take the safe route in view of the absence of any comment by a 
judge (juries usually have no say in this).

The provider may be in the right but it could cost them their business 
to try and establish that. However much they might want to keep you 
happy, they will sacrifice you to stay in business. (After all, the 
result of anything else would be you unhappy because the thing was taken 
down when the business collapsed).
-- 
John Underwood
Do not change the Reply-To: address - it will work for at least 30 days.
After that visit <http://theunderwoods.org.uk/contact.html> for a
current contact address. Do not write to the From: address.

In message , John 
Underwood  writes
>On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 at 06:55:16,  wrote in uk.net.providers 
>(Reference: )
>
>
>>I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down just
>>because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much prefer
>>the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the legal
>>process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.
>
>
>Look at Godfrey v Demon to see how futile is that hope. Godfrey did 
>take it to law, Demon fought and could not afford to go beyond the High 
>Court - by which time they were hundreds of thousands of pounds down 
>the drain. The result is an indeterminate situation, since no judgement 
>was ever issued. As a result, no lawyer could responsibly give advice 
>other than take it down in the face of a complaint.

The OP clearly stated they are looking for servers in the US so I very 
much doubt that the legal situation in the UK will have any influence on 
the hosting provider...
-- 
Dominic Sexton

"John Underwood"  
wrote in message 
news:141RuDCaZBwGFAmY@dontspam.theunderwoods.org.uk...
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 at 06:55:16,  wrote in uk.net.providers 
> (Reference: )
>
>
>>I therefore want to avoid ISPs/webhosts that will take stuff down 
>>just
>>because someone (or their lawyer!) says it's defamatory. I much 
>>prefer
>>the idea that if someone has a real grievance, let them use the 
>>legal
>>process and everyone can abide by any resultant judicial orders.
>
>
> Look at Godfrey v Demon to see how futile is that hope. Godfrey did 
> take it to law, Demon fought and could not afford to go beyond the 
> High Court
<snip>

The above relates to the UK, the OP expressly asked for hosts were the 
servers are sited in and subject to USA laws...

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:27:28 -0700, hanrahan398@yahoo.co.uk put finger
to keyboard and typed:

>I'd be grateful if someone could recommend a web hosting company
>meeting the following criteria:
>
>a) will register a domain name "anonymously", i.e. through a proxy, so
>that customer's details are not present in the whois records, but the
>customer still remains the owner of the domain
>
>b) allows customer to change DNS records without charge or asking
>permission

Dreamhost will do both of the above. 

>c) keeps its servers in the US, and will ONLY take down a customer's
>site on receipt of a US court order, signed by a judge, and NOT just
>on a complainant's say-so, however important the complainant may
>sound. (The website and domain will not be used for spamming,
>spreading racist hate material, publishing sexually explicit stuff,
>hacking, etc., so I will have no