|
All Archives /
aussie-isp /
2004-12
|
<<< Date >>> | |
| Permanent Link | ||
|
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:37:34 +1000
From: Reid To: Craig Sanders Cc: Oz-ISP Mailing list Message-Id: <1101861454.3811.22.camel@dragonslair.au00.com> In-Reply-To: <20041130042257.GB10516@taz.net.au> References: <20041126121647.413417@c610> <1101447127.3949.17.camel@dragonslair.au00.com> <20041126123954.GF4563@taz.net.au> <1101515903.3926.19.camel@dragonslair.au00.com> <20041127013438.GH4563@taz.net.au> <1101548020.3920.24.camel@dragonslair.au00.com> <20041128001909.GC2757@taz.net.au> <1101762796.3933.9.camel@dragonslair.au00.com> <20041129215727.GC26817@taz.net.au> <1101781689.3933.56.camel@dragonslair.au00.com> <20041130042257.GB10516@taz.net.au> Subject: Re: [Oz-ISP] DNS hijacking and Pennsylvania Web blocking law (struck down) |
Followups: <20041202042056.GK22136@taz.net.au> |
|
On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 15:22 +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: > > How typical of you to resort to abuse when confronted over a medium in > > which you purport to be so adept, and to accuse another of seeing things > > in black and white because they disagree with you. > > i call it as i see it. in this particular case, it's self-evident. In any real world situation where a face to face confrontation occurred, your behavior would result in a quick end to the discussion for you. Certainly in the case of one who does not suffer fools. > > Ah yes, facts are irrelevant. > > no, i never said that facts are irrelevant. i said that the fact (or not) of > whether bigpond is a carrier or just an ISP is irrelevant - it is illegal for > *ANYONE*, not just carriers, to intercept or divert telecommunications. I'll > spell that out for you in simple terms so you'll be sure to understand: I can't wait. > it is illegal for a carrier to intercept telecommunications traffic. > it is illegal for an ISP to intercept telecomms. > it is illegal for a private citizen to intercept telecomms. > it is illegal for a business, company, corporation, association, or other > organisation to intercept telecomms. > it is illegal for a government department to intercept telecomms. > it is illegal for *ANYONE AT ALL* to intercept telecomms. Spelling out complete. Thank you Craig. > the only exception is when there is a duly authorised warrant that specifically > permits such diversion or interception. It's a huge leap of faith to take phone tapping law, and apply it to dns provision, but what the hell go ahead. Take it to court and try it. You may want to brush up on your version of the law though, and remember, one who acts as his own legal representative, acts for a fool. http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/0/464/0/PA000160.htm Let us all know how you go. I'm sure your massive legal expertise will carry the day for the good guys. Bye Craig. -- Reid <r e i d . h a l l @ a u 0 0 . c o m ---- email "unsubscribe aussie-isp" to m a j o r d o m o @ a u s s i e . n e t to be removed. |
|