[64714] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: more on filtering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daryl@introspect.net)
Fri Oct 31 11:31:06 2003
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:27:34 -0500
From: <daryl@introspect.net>
To: <cparker@starnetusa.net>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Parker [mailto:cparker@starnetusa.net]=20
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 11:18 AM
> To: Daryl G. Jurbala
> Subject: RE: more on filtering
>=20
[...]=20
> Ah, you are a member of which bar? :)
I knew that one was coming ;) Actually, I mentioned in my last reply
that I happened to be on the phone with my contract attorney after I
read that post (on a completely unrelated issue.....I don't normally
burn attorney fees on NANOG threads ;). I asked him about it
specifically.
[...]
> If I sell something to you that binds you to certain terms=20
> and conditions, are you saying that you can resell that=20
> someone else who is not bound to at least the same terms and=20
> conditions?
Yes, it's possible. It's a grey area....it's not quite selling
something you don't own, but it's close. The guy I was talking to
didn't know of any specifics where someone had actually been burned by
this, other than getting slammed by their upstream.
> And that I would have no ability to enforce the=20
> terms and conditions agreed to by Cust X on the use of the=20
> service by Cust Y?
That's the legalese part....NO, you have no remedy against your
customer's customer. Only against your direct customer. That's the
point I was trying to make about the agreements not being transitive in
that way. I'm told that specific legal point significantly adds to the
bulk of reseller agreements (although I think it's because the attorneys
get paid by the word).
OK...that's enough OT for me.
Daryl
