[24751] in Cypherpunks
Re: SAN FRANCISCO EDITORIAL
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy M. Silvernail)
Tue Jan 3 21:38:20 1995
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
X-Original-Article-From: paul@poboy.b17c.ingr.com (Paul Robichaux)
From: roy@cybrspc.mn.org (Roy M. Silvernail)
Reply-To: roy@cybrspc.mn.org
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 17:31:30 CST
In-Reply-To: <199501032006.AA04977@poboy.b17c.ingr.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In list.cypherpunks, perobich@ingr.com writes:
> Despite the odiousness of the source, might it be a Good Thing to get
> a law giving ISPs common-carrier status passed?
>
> When you're a common carrier, no one hassles you about the content you
> pass-- this would make it much easier for anon remailers to flourish.
I can't speak for ISPs in general, but when I still ran a public-access
system, the absolute last thing I wanted was to be thought of as a
common carrier. While common carriers are held blameless for the
content of traffic they pass, they are also heavily regulated. In
general, a common carrier may not refuse to provide services unless
special circumstances exist. Want to bet Usenet abuse won't be one of
those circumstances? Spammers would love such a state of affairs. (and
remember who wrote that whine)
I'm for keeping regulation out of the Inet whenever and wherever
possible.
- --
Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy@cybrspc.mn.org
PGP public key available by mail
echo /get /pub/pubkey.asc | mail file-request@cybrspc.mn.org
These are, of course, my opinions (and my machines)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.1
iQCVAwUBLwnfPxvikii9febJAQF/QwQAuwj1FBH/Dcx0eG6gES6DB0cxYroSHkCe
L1QP67dyjtyQ+DGIV/+JLUJuAuszmNenzv2dqUL//Nmp5dpLqVSTm2n4D6cGrs3/
YlU0J1TixBnoPMkOKFs18czBQRw/ezSH9tnCKQ0PFf+f1Se/tvS3htOxohkKPpGe
7g85dDm4wow=
=slH/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
