|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Major Labels v. Backbones
On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 11:46, Owen DeLong wrote: *snip* > Please, the intent of that sentence is to say that the ISP cannot set > the > destination IP address for the content. The intervening backbones don't > do > that, they merely copy it to the next hop as the MAC addresses are > modified > to send it along it's way. The RECIPIENT is DETERMINED (set) by the > originator of the communication. There are two hosts which could be > argued > to participate in this process, and they are at the ends of the > conversation. > The routers in between do not meet the test. If this is the basis of your argument, multicast backbones would be a legal liability. How about a 1-800 conference circuit? The concept is the same, as is the level of content participation. The difference is the legal protection offered to the voice common-carrier is greater than what is offered to IP carriers. -- Jeff S Wheeler [email protected] Software Development Five Elements, Inc http://www.five-elements.com/~jsw/
|