tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16768201.post3916159073481262493..comments2023-09-13T06:17:38.045-05:00Comments on Try Reason!: ISP packet filteringAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03560477246248417263noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16768201.post-20890457031492013752009-02-21T18:08:00.000-06:002009-02-21T18:08:00.000-06:00John,Thank you for your reply. I can see your poin...John,<BR/>Thank you for your reply. I can see your point. My knowledge of law is weak, and I look at the matter from quite selfish perspective: First priority is that my communications do work without disruption, my job relies on this. Even I would like to see copyright holders paid, this is of secondary importance to me. The practical issue was resolved, for now, by switching DSL from AT&T to Atlantic Nexus.<BR/><BR/>Best regards,<BR/>Pekka LehtikoskiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16768201.post-38348954030910336472009-02-19T19:04:00.000-06:002009-02-19T19:04:00.000-06:00Pekka,Thank you for your comment. If I were to re...Pekka,<BR/>Thank you for your comment. If I were to reword your argument, it would be that AT&T may not control the content traveling over their service, no matter what. If AT&T offers a service, they may not put any conditions on that service. If AT&T offers their property (the telephone lines) for others to use, AT&T may not limit that usage, but must make it available for all for any purpose, even if those purposes disrupt the service of other people using that service. <BR/><BR/>That just isn't tenable. <BR/><BR/>Perhaps you say this because of some mistaken assumptions about our legal system. First, the right to privacy, as the law currently stands, only applies to our government, not to corporations. So AT&T is not ignoring privacy laws...they simply do not apply. Second, AT&T is not taking the law into their own hands, they are taking their property into their own hands and merely excluding certain service (not prosecuting, convicting, or punishing offenders). <BR/><BR/>From the practical complaint you have, consider placing your anger and frustration with those violating others rights...those illegally copying files that are copyrighted.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03560477246248417263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16768201.post-49993143074339361382009-02-19T17:11:00.000-06:002009-02-19T17:11:00.000-06:00I think that law enforcement belongs to police, no...I think that law enforcement belongs to police, not to corporations, etc. For example if my mail man would read trough my mail because the US postal service would like to know if I am doing something illegal, I would be somewhat upset. Same thing if AT&T is listening in for my phone calls. This attempt of set of corporations to ignore privacy laws and take law into their own hands is at least questionable. If police doesn't have sufficient resources to deal with illegal internet use, we as voters should grant those trough political system. <BR/>There is also practical aspect. The packet filtering software cannot separate my leagal use of peer to peer communication from illegal use of some other persons.<BR/><BR/>Besr regards,<BR/>Pekka LehtikoskiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16768201.post-73890436775293260892008-01-29T11:08:00.000-06:002008-01-29T11:08:00.000-06:00hey John its dave brown from indecon. i was google...hey John its dave brown from indecon. i was googleing about indecon and came across your blog; i realiezed i dont have your email adress. drop me a line sometime. adbrown1@lakeheadu.caFiredgloryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13142981689385562656noreply@blogger.com