Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: NYT on Thing.net (fwd)

  • From: David Schwartz
  • Date: Tue Jan 14 07:33:10 2003

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 06:25:51 -0500 (EST), Miles Fidelman wrote:

>This is why ISPs should be treated as common carriers - just like
>telcos.
>The primary characteristic of common carriers is that they HAVE TO
>serve
>all customers except under very tightly controlled circumstance,
>like a
>court order against on obscene caller.  Everyone is protected - the
>telcos
>can't tell you who you can and can't call or what you can say on a
>phone
>conversation, and at the same time the telcos are not liable for
>what you
>say.  Common carrier status is typically associated with heavy
>regulation,
>but it need not be.

	Governments have already conclusively demonstrated that they're not 
competent to decide what traffic belongs on my network. How long has 
it been, and still not only no law against spam but not even a 
definition of one. Better to leave the control of what traffic passes 
over my network to me.

	DS






Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.