🚀 go-pugleaf

I am not a legal expert, but to me SWITCH seems to be 'legally trapped'
in this case.

It may not be legal to control information passed by SWITCH and to censor
it. It may furthermore be legally questionnable whether SWITCH can keep
its customers from getting what the 'paid' for. Then again there might be
legal action against SWITCH _if_ they distribute information of offensive
nature to anyone. 

But...

if there IS a need for censorship, that censorship has to be executed by
the state and the authorities in charge, and NOT by SWITCH. If SWITCH feels
certain newsgroups contain articles that are (or might be) offensive to
anyone, then it is up to SWITCH to ask the federal authorities to censor
these articles (censor in this case meaning, control, evaluate and judge
over offensive/non-offensive). In no case, however, SWITCH should execute
censorship by itself, because it has neither the rights, nor an explicit
duty, nor personnel qualified to do so.

Just my 0.02 Franks.

- Apostolos Lytras
  SysAdm ICU

Disclaimer: My opinions are not my employer's, they may even not be my own.