Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 15:03:04 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: "Terry Lambert" <tlambert@primenet.com>, <alk@pobox.com> Cc: <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups Message-ID: <000201bf06d8$932f5ac0$021d85d1@youwant.to> In-Reply-To: <199909242155.OAA26546@usr05.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Any blacklisting, like the RBL and/or the DUL, is potentially > actionable under current "Restraint of Trade" laws and under the > RICO "Anti-Racketeering" statutes. There also may be a cause of > action under the Sherman Antitrust Act, and under the First > Ammendment (as "prior restraint" by systems which have not yet > been abused by an abuser who has found himself placed on a list). It is no more blacklisting than requiring a password to log into a computer blacklists everyone without a password. It doesn't prevent any content from going anywhere, it simply sets technical requirements upon the _form_. > The DUL is on much shakier ground, since many ISPs dialup address > assignment blocks have been entered involuntarily, without an > offense by the particular address being placed in the list. Yes, it's one of the many limitations that come with the access provided. There are tons of others. Access to the Internet is not a blank check to send any packet to any place you might wish to send it. Being on the DUL is not a punishment of any sort. It's simply a means to require a technical requirement, namely that mail be handled by machines that have long-term reachability. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000201bf06d8$932f5ac0$021d85d1>