Adelphia and kazaa....

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by scott palmero, Jul 25, 2003.

  1. Will adelphia cut off my service for downloading from kazaa. I know
    verizon doesn't but they are not as cuthroat as adelphia.
     
    scott palmero, Jul 25, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. scott palmero

    Brian H¹© Guest

    X-No-Archive: Yes
    scott palmero said:
    And if you have legitimate use for kazaa, ie sharing your stuff, why would they
    find it necessary to cut you off?
     
    Brian H¹©, Jul 25, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. scott palmero

    °Mike° Guest

    If you steal, you deserve to get cut off. If you don't, then
    you have nothing to worry about.
     
    °Mike°, Jul 25, 2003
    #3
  4. scott palmero

    SgtMinor Guest

    Adelphi will cu his throat.
     
    SgtMinor, Jul 25, 2003
    #4
  5. scott palmero

    Jimchip Guest

    On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 20:05:47 -0500, Richard wrote:
    [snip]
    Uh, St00pid, they are threatening to prosecute directly- They are
    getting the names from the ISP. The ISP is terminating the account on
    their own.

    Troll-o-meter: "Richard" = Richard Bullis; Category = Kook
    -----------------------
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
    -----------------------
    /\
    ||

    Don't listen to "Richard". If there is ever any truth to what
    he says it is for the same reason a broken clock is correct twice a day.

    An example of Richard Bullis' technical knowledge:
    "Ho hum. another loudmouth wise ass.
    first of all buddy boy, newsgroups are not attached to the internet.
    they are two seperate entities.
    as a matter of fact, the newsgroups were on line before the internet
    was."
    Message-ID: <6rki6o$cqd$>

    A recent reply to Richard Bullis:
    "I really hate to say this, but Bullis....you are an absolute idiot. I
    am in awe at your complete lack of comprehension ability, and your utter
    ignorance."
    Message-ID: <>


    ---*For More Information On NetKook Richard Bullis*---
    http://www.lart.com/rtsfaq/
    ------------------------------------------------------
     
    Jimchip, Jul 26, 2003
    #5
  6. Baron Von Reeve Spilled my beer when they jumped on the table and
    I doubt that's really possible. You see, when you (TINY) sign up
    for an ISP, you agree to abide by their rules, not doing anything
    illegal/etc. Technically, MP3 swapping is illegal (Copyright vio).

    It's just been recently the ISPs have stopped looking the other
    way. Can't blame them because if they don't terminate an acct, then
    they're legally liable, I believe.

    NOI
     
    Thund3rstruck, Jul 26, 2003
    #6
  7. scott palmero

    Jimchip Guest

    They actually are liable if there is supervision involved based on a
    prior sentence. Several jurisdictions have had judgements rendered
    against them for new crimes committed.

    ISPs could be liable if, after notification, they continue to supply the
    connection used. It's easier to terminate the account than to try to
    block out the activity (if it's even possible).
     
    Jimchip, Jul 26, 2003
    #7
  8. scott palmero

    Michael Guest

    Easier, yeah, but it's not at all by the book, is it?

    Applying the logic above, continued service would only be an ISP liability
    if the RIAA (or whomever) first got a judgement against the user for
    copyright violation, and then discovered the user doing it again through the
    same ISP's network.

    ((U))
    M
     
    Michael, Jul 26, 2003
    #8
  9. Michael Spilled my beer when they jumped on the table and proclaimed
    Apples and oranges.

    NOI
     
    Thund3rstruck, Jul 26, 2003
    #9
  10. scott palmero

    Michael Guest

    True, and they *are* clear to cut you off for violating AUP.

    Point well made and taken. Thanks. :)

    ((U))
    M
     
    Michael, Jul 26, 2003
    #10
  11. scott palmero

    Jimchip Guest

    I don't know if you have seen this:
    http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/howto-notgetsued.php

    It does look like this initial RIAA salvo is a scare tactic.

    There's little doubt that the major media outlets are looking to make
    big money by pushing their media over broadband and a lot of this stuff
    now is just trying to get positioned for some years down the road. The
    napster, etc stuff was just the wakeup to the clueless media companies
    and they're trying to clamp down and get things settled before the real
    big money is at risk.

    "Coming Soon to an Internet near you"
     
    Jimchip, Jul 26, 2003
    #11
  12. This 'law' applies where, exactly?

    --
    zar 2k3 - ULC Reverend
    Certified Word Police Officer - Details Detail
    http://www.geocities.com/spamresources/spambots.htm
    http://www.drcnet.org/ http://www.abovegod.com/
    NuMbEr Tr3#3!!!!11! on a lits...

    "A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs,
    a coloratura, maps, snipe, percale, macaroni,
    a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag
    again (or a camel), a crepe, pins, Spam, a rut,
    a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats, a peon, a canal
    - Panama!"

    - Guy Steele Jr., CLTL2
     
    Doctor Monsignor Larville Jones MD, Jul 26, 2003
    #12
  13. scott palmero

    SgtMinor Guest

    That's the law in PA, as I understand it: "Pennsylvania's "Dram Shop
    Act" is a statute that imposes liability on drinking establishments for
    any injury that results from serving alcohol to visibly intoxicated
    persons." http://www.edgarsnyder.com/injured/alcohol/third_party.html

    And: "According to the Insurance Information Institute, forty-two
    states and the District of Columbia have laws that hold liquor servers
    liable for the damage a drunk driver causes."
    http://www.telcominsgrp.com/safety/ Safe%20Holiday%20Parties.doc
     
    SgtMinor, Jul 26, 2003
    #13
  14. --

    "It's amazing I won. I was running against
    peace, prosperity, and incumbency."
    - Dubya Bush, June 14 2001, unaware that live
    television cameras were still rolling.
     
    Doctor Monsignor Larville Jones MD, Jul 27, 2003
    #14
  15. I believe it has also been upheld way up here in the far and frozen
    North Woods.

    UseNet Rules #n:
    No firm info at the present time is available on just what the other UseNet
    Rules #n are. However, at a guess, they include:
    --
    Rule #nonumber: There are no hard-and-fast Rules on UseNet, only Guidelines,
    which are more or less strictly enforced (and differ) from group to group;
    this is why it's generally wise to read any group for a bit before ever
    posting to it.
    Rule #0: *There* *is* *no* *C*b*l*. There *is*, however, a net-wide
    conspiracy designed solely to lead Dave Hayes (q.v.) to believe that there
    is a C*b*l.
    Corollary: *There* *are* *no* *pods*.
    Rule #9: It's *always* September, *somewhere* on the Net.
    Dave Fischer's Extension: 1993 was The Year September Never Ended [so far,
    there doesn't seem to be much evidence he's wrong...]
    Rule #17: Go not to UseNet for counsel, for they will say both `No' and
    `Yes' and `Try another newsgroup'.
    Rule #2 (John Gilmore): "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes
    around it."
    Rule #108 (from the soc.motss FAQ): "What will happen to me if I read
    soc.motss?" "In general, nothing. (You may be informed or infuriated, of
    course; but that's a standard Usenet hazard.)"
    Rule #666: Old alt groups never die. They don't fade away nicely, either.
    Rule #7-B: There is no topic so thoroughly covered that noone will ever
    bring it up again.
    Rule #90120: Applying your standards to someone else's post *will* result
    in a flamewar.
    Rule #1: Spellling and grammer counts. So do grace, wit, and a sense of
    humor (the latter two are different), as well as a willingness to meet
    odd people, but these are lesser considerations.
    Rule #x^2: FAQs are asked frequently. Get used to them.
    Rule #29: no rational discourse can happen in a thread cross-posted to
    more than two newsgroups.
    rule #6 (Eddie Saxe): don't post to misc.test unless you understand the
    consequences.
    Rule #547 (Arne Adolfsen): When people know they're wrong they resort to ad
    hominems.
    Rule #37 (Faisal Nameer Jawdat): Read the thread from the beginning, or else.
    Rule #5 (Reimer's Reason): Nobody ever ignores what they should ignore on
    Usenet.
    Rule $19.99 (Brad `Squid' Shapcott): The Internet *isn't* *free*. It just has
    an economy that makes no sense to capitalism.
    Rule #3 ("Why 3?" "Because we felt like it"): For every opinion there is at
    least one equally loud and opposing opinion; sometimes stated as:
    Rule #27 (Gary Lewandowski): "In cyberspace, *everyone* can hear you scream."
    And for completeness' sake:

    Rule #4: (Godwin's Rule) Any off-topic mention of Hitler or Nazis will cause
    the thread it is mentioned in to an irrelevant and off-topic end very soon;
    every thread on UseNet has a constantly-increasing probability to contain
    such a mention.
    Quirk's Exception: Intentional invocation of this so-called "Nazi Clause" is
    ineffectual.
    Case's Corollary: If the subject is Heinlein or homosexuality, the
    probability of a Hitler/Nazi comparison being made becomes equal to one.
    - net.legends FAQ (<URL:http://www.uiuc.edu/
    ~tskirvin/faqs/legends.html>)
     
    Pinears P HornSwaGGle, Jul 27, 2003
    #15
  16. I'm sure it wouldn't float over here TINH.
    Toodle-oo, Caribou.
    --

    "It's amazing I won. I was running against
    peace, prosperity, and incumbency."
    - Dubya Bush, June 14 2001, unaware that live
    television cameras were still rolling.
     
    Doctor Monsignor Larville Jones MD, Jul 27, 2003
    #16
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.