|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: more on filtering
> >> I don't see how that is the same thing here. I have an > >> agreement with cust X to provide services in accordance with > >> my AUP. cust X resells that service to cust Y, etc. cust Y > >> is bound to the terms and conditions of my agreement with > >> cust X, despite that I do not have a direct agreement with cust Y. > > > > Oh christ...network engineers trying to be lawyers. Hey, it's only fair - I'm trying to be a network engineer. :-) The concept about which the original poster is speaking is probably that of either "sub-licensees" or "third party beneficiaries" (different things, but he is probably thinking of one of those two concepts). In the former, it means that his *users* are bound by the same criteria as is he if he makes a contract with someone (it was the concept we used at Habeas to bind ISP users if an ISP signed a license with Habeas). The latter, third party beneficiaries, is *actually* what one would need to bind a users' own customers to the users' contract, and that must be spelled out explicitly in the contract between ISP and customer X. Anne Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. President/CEO Institute for Spam & Internet Public Policy Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of SJ
|