[ale] firewalls... illegal? Cany anyone read legalese?

[Robert L. Harris]

(Of course IANAL):

  Um, so I've got 6 machines at home on a normal "home" account.  To run
multiple machines I'm supposed to have multiple IP's they can charge me
for in their mindset.  Thus in thier opinion I'm defrauding them by not
paying them for all the computers I have hooked up to my cable modem...


Thus spake Dan Newcombe (Newcombe at mordor.clayton.edu):

> On Sun, 30 Mar 2003, J.M. Taylor wrote:
> > Passing a law that would globally make NATting firewalls illegal would
> > impact most government agencies in the state, as well as schools, banks,
> > businesses, and anyone who's online.  It is hard for me to imagine that
> 
> Only if it is in an attempt to defaud your service provider.  If I am the
> state, a school or whatever, chances are I have a much more lenient terms
> of service than I do as a cable modem subscriber with a clause in my
> contract saying something about not hooking up more than one computer,
> etc...
> 
> It's not that they are outlawing NAT/firewalls, they are just making it
> illegal to use them if your contract says you shouldn't.  Protecting
> business interests...seriously, how many home users would this apply to?
> 
> There are already laws about fraud, why add little details to it?
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale

:wq!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert L. Harris                     | PGP Key ID: E344DA3B
                                         @ x-hkp://pgp.mit.edu 
DISCLAIMER:
      These are MY OPINIONS ALONE.  I speak for no-one else.

Diagnosis: witzelsucht  	

IPv6 = robert at ipv6.rdlg.net	http://ipv6.rdlg.net
IPv4 = robert at mail.rdlg.net	http://www.rdlg.net

 PGP signature