[TZubiri]

My understanding is that arbitrum has an IP, but this video was not using their IP, that it was a false positive in terms of identifying the IP, in addition to a false positive of malicious intent.

What you are saying is that these claims never relate to IP and it was only a false positive of malicious intent?

[gruez]

>What you are saying is that these claims never relate to IP and it was only a false positive of malicious intent?

I'm not sure how you got that impression. If you read my previous comment it's pretty clear I only objected on the basis they don't have relevant IP, not on the principle of being able to use IP to issue take down scams.