North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Monitoring, Flow Stats (Re: spam whore, norcal-systems)
> Owen DeLong in private communication points up that he thinks that this > permission is transitive. That has the problem that it trivially obviates > all privacy. Every provider is automatically authorized, no one is not > authorized. Privacy is in the eyes of the provider. The ECPA was intended > to prevent communications providers from looking at things they shouldn't > and don't need to. So I'm not convinced. **thanks to Dean Robb, the > Attorneys manual says it must be "specifically authorized" > Apologies to the list for posting this, but I had to respond to this violation of my privacy and this slander. No, I didn't. I said that my AUP/TOS can create a transitive OBLIGATION to disclose on the part of the downstream providers. Further, I have repeatedly said that if the downstream providers can provide their service to spammers without violating my AUP/TOS, then there is no issue. However, if they deliver content to my network for transit which is in violation of my AUP/TOS, then I have the rights to defend my property from this theft of service. Owen
|