Packetstream - how does this not violate just about every provider's ToS?

Thu Apr 25 16:10:34 UTC 2019

feeling cranky, are we, job?   (accusing an antispam expert of spamming on a mailing list by having too long a .sig?)
but it’s true!  anne runs the internet, and the rest of us (except for ICANN GAC representatives) all accept that.

to actually try to make a more substantial point, i am quite curious how the AUPs of carriers try to disallow bandwidth resale while permitting

• cybercafe operations and other “free wifi" (where internet service might be provided for patrons in a hotel or cafe)
• wireless access point schemes where you make money or get credit for allowing use of your bandwidth (e.g. Fon)
• other proxy services that use bandwidth such as tor exit nodes and openvpn gateways

i suppose they could just try to disallow resale or allow on-premises use even if revenue is received.  the Fon business model seems pretty comparable to me.
On Apr 24, 2019, 10:51 PM -0700, Job Snijders <job at instituut.net>, wrote:
> Dear Anne,
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:07:51PM -0600, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
> > How can this not be a violation of the ToS of just about every major provider?
>
> Can you perhaps cite ToS excerpts from one or more major providers to
> support your assertion?
>
> > Anne P. Mitchell,
> > Attorney at Law
> > GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
> > Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
> > Legislative Consultant
> > CEO/President, Institute for Social Internet Public Policy
> > Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
> > Board of Directors, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
> > Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute
> > Legal Counsel: The Earth Law Center
> > California Bar Association
> > Cal. Bar Cyberspace Law Committee
> > Colorado Cyber Committee
> > Ret. Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of San Jose
> > Ret. Chair, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
>
> Are you listing all the above because you are presenting a formal
> position supported by all these organisations about ToS? Can you for
> instance clarify how signing of as a director for the Denver Internet
> Exchange shapes the context of your ToS message?
>
> Or, perhaps you are listing the above for some kind of self-marketing
> purposes? If that is the case, please note that it is fairly uncommon to
> use the NANOG mailing list to distribute resumes. I know numerous
> websites dedicated to the dissemination of work histories, perhaps you
> can use those instead of operational mailling list?
>
> Regards,
>
> Job
>
> ps. RFC 3676 section 4.3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20190425/31047643/attachment.html>