North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Horrible Service Agreements
- From: Dean Anderson
- Date: Mon Dec 01 14:19:57 1997
The contract probably includes a clause that if a clause is found to be
unenforceable, then that clause will be deleted, and the remaining clauses
will continue in effect.
However, do not let yourself be cornered into paying different rates for
different traffic content. I would cross out those clauses. Otherwise,
they will be able to charge you more for a "spam line" later. If its truly
unacceptable, then walk away.
I suspect legally, things will go the same way for spam as they did for
telemarketing, bulk postal mail, commercial tv and radio. Money talks.
Which is why investors built these commercial networks anyway.
I suspect that much spam can't be stopped, without a constitutional
amendment. MCI can't disconnect phone service from telemarketing
companies, MailBoxes Etc can't refuse to deliver bulk mail, and I doubt a
major company can disconnect major spammers who send legal messages.
Indeed, someone might even suggest some actively target and solicit such
companies for service for the tremendous revenue they produce.
Eventually, someone will sue over spam, and the issue will be settled.
Furthermore, I suspect the "concern" is mostly smoke too. Despite all the
claims of spammer problems, I have not seen any significant change in the
amount spam I receive over the last 6 months, and I seem to get a lot from
the same sources. They don't get shut off, and then pop up somewhere else,
as one would expect if anyone was actually doing anything about spam.
Complaints about AGIS spewed on this group, but no else has done anything
How many ISP's are really going to disconnect spammers? Has anyone
actually disconnected a spam customer? How come cyberpromo and savoynet are
still connected? They must connect to someone who connects to someone...
who has an AUP that is being violated. Why isn't their provider
I think its pretty clear that it doesn't matter to the network service
providers what the contents of your packets are. You will have paid for
them no matter what they contain. The customer is paying for, and is
therefore entitled to, some amount of bandwidth of whatever garbage they
choose to send and receive.
Likewise, it doesn't (shouldn't) matter to the phone company whether your
leased T1 is carrying internet traffic or voice traffic to a PBX somewhere.
It should be the same rate regardless of the content of the traffic.
Schemes which change rates depending on the content are not in the interest
of the customer. So when you are in the role of customer of your uplink,
don't accept them.
Plain Aviation, Inc firstname.lastname@example.org