[178521] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Collin Anderson)
Sat Feb 28 00:48:30 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20150227233223.18612.qmail@ary.lan>
From: Collin Anderson <collin@averysmallbird.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 14:48:07 +0900
To: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 8:32 AM, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
> With the "legal content" rule, I expect some bottom feeding bulk
> mailers to sue claiming that their CAN SPAM compliant spam is legal,
> therefore the providers can't block it.
>
How would this legal environment be any different than the pre-Verizon
network neutrality rules for network management of SPAM?
--
*Collin David Anderson*
averysmallbird.com | @cda | Washington, D.C.
