I think it is the first time there is a court ruling specifically against a public DNS resolver?
https://torrentfreak.com/sony-wins-pirate-site-blocking-order-against-dns-resolver-quad9-210621/ Note the reasoning (if some german-speaking person can confirm this is a fair summary?): > One of the arguments that Sony brought up in court was that Quad9 > already blocks various problematic sites voluntarily. This is indeed common in court: either you are neutral or you are not and, in the second case, you can no longer claim you are "just an intermediary". When you start filtering DNS answers, it is hard to resist pressures to add more filtering.
