[32461] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Shawn McMahon)
Wed Nov 22 10:24:05 2000
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 10:20:22 -0500
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon@eiv.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20001122102022.D8536@eiv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="W5WqUoFLvi1M7tJE"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <47FE39302BF73B4C93BC84B87341282C1F2D@condor.lvrmr.mhsc.com>; from rmeyer@mhsc.com on Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 02:12:38PM -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--W5WqUoFLvi1M7tJE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 02:12:38PM -0800, Roeland Meyer wrote:
>=20
> engineers doing this when it could have been prevented? I have. Three
> contractors, doing this, in over-time, at Silicon-Valley rates is well ov=
er
> $20K. More than enough to make it worth my while to sue my upstream.
And did you sue, or did you request the filter be removed?
You stated earlier in this thread that what you would do, and what
anyone reasonable would do, is immediately call their lawyer.
Did you call him first, or did you contact the upstream first?
--W5WqUoFLvi1M7tJE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE6G+Q2Ecl9bQ0RMt0RArKmAJ0XexQM0bVM+XezK6jyWsxGIZ2ovgCfTe0D
guh+uxNenQ012umPBRFC4zY=
=ioyf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--W5WqUoFLvi1M7tJE--
