譯文（字數 1896）：

早在其1995年的《知識產權與國家信息基礎設施：知識產權工作組的報告》（即通稱的“白皮書” 中），就涉及到ISP的地位與責任問題。“白皮書”認為，ISP的系統或網絡中的基于其履行中介服務所必需的自動、暫時性復制與傳輸，屬于版權法上的復制，ISP應對此負嚴格責任。1996年2月通過的《通信正當行為法》中也曾規定ISP有權出于善意對其認為是侵權、違法的信息進行遮攔、屏蔽，而不管這些信息是否受憲法保護，均不承擔責任；如在ISP的系統或網絡中出現侵權或違法信息，不論其是否有過錯均應負責。后該法由于受到普遍反對而被最高法院以違憲為由裁定廢止。

外，該法也規定，非營利性教育機構在履行上述四種功能時同樣適用責任限制的有關規定。只不過在其履行1）、2）功能時，職員或研究生被當作“個人”而非“ISP”，以避免其所在機構因不符合責任限制待遇的條件而不能享受責任限制待遇；對其他情況，職員或研究生的主觀過錯將不會對其所在機構享受責任限制待遇造成影響

外文原文（字符數 6552）：

The United States of America: early in its1995" intellectual property and the National Information Infrastructure: Intellectual Property Working Group report" (i.e., popularly known as the" white paper" ), it relates to the ISP and the status of responsibility. " White paper" think, ISP system or network based on its performance of intermediary services necessary for the automatic, transient replication and transmission, which belongs to the copyright law copy, ISP should be strictly liable for. 1996February through the" communication" as act ever also provides ISP has the right to its considered out of goodwill infringement, illegal information block, shielding, regardless of whether the information is protected by the constitution, shall not bear the liability; as in the ISP system or network in tort or illegal information, regardless of whether the at fault shall be liable to. After the law due to widespread opposition and was rejected by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional by the ruling annulled.