Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 18:41:05 -0500 (CDT) From: Jay Nelson <jdn@acp.qiv.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9909241815350.1185-100000@acp.qiv.com> In-Reply-To: <199909242155.OAA26546@usr05.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Terry Lambert wrote: [snip] >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). I hope you are wrong on this point. The notion that the "internet" is a _public_ asset is nonsense. As long as it exists as a number of private entities funding their own voluntary participation, I don't see how any of these "acts" apply. Otherwise you are faced with the oxymoron of denying first amendment freedoms to one group to protect the first amendment rights of another. There is no right either explicitly stated or implied in any constitution that I've seen that guarantees anyone the right to freely use private assets -- which is exactly what spammers do. To be fair -- you are probably right in your assessment. Constitutions don't appear to mean much anymore and an actionable suit will probably be filed in the near future. If such a suit succeeds, it's probably time to leave the "internet." -- Jay 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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9909241815350.1185-100000>