Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Derek Martin wrote: > I wish I were a lawyer, or at least were good friends with one. Not > that it matters... I hate big business. All of them. > > I've just reviewed AT&T/@Home's agreement, and while in some ways it's > better than the original one I signed with MediaOne (THERE IS NO > ANTI-SERVER CLAUSE), there are quite a few things I really hate about <SNIP> > And what do you mean they're filtering port 80? What do you mean they > said you can't run a web server? It says you can right in their > agreement: > > (b) FTP/HTTP Service Setup. Customer should be aware that when using > the Service to access the Internet or any other online network or > service, there are certain applications, such as FTP (File Transfer > Protocol) server or HTTP (Hyper Text Transfer Protocol) server, which > may be used to allow other Service users and Internet users to gain > access to Customer's computer. If Customer chooses to run such > applications, Customer should take the appropriate security > measures. Neither AT&T nor @Home Network shall have any liability > whatsoever for any claims, losses, actions, damages, suits or > proceedings resulting from, arising out of or otherwise relating to > the use of such applications by Customer, including without > limitation, damages resulting from others accessing Customer's > computer. > > "If Customer chooses to run such applications, Customer should take > the appropriate security measures." Now that I agree with! Except I > can't, because they're filtering port 80. So despite the fact that > they've said I *CAN* run a web server, they're not letting me. What's > their excuse? You can read it for yourself here: It certainly seems contradictary. In one part, they say "don't run servers." In another part they say "if you're going to run servers, be careful." What I'm curious about is the legality of the agreement as a whole, in that I never actually agreed to it. I has MediaOne, which turned into RoadRunner, which turned into AT&T. But I never agreed to tat contract. I assume there's an implied agreement since I am using the service, but it would be interesting to hear an informed opinion. So the few people who managed to get DSL are probably having a good chortle over all of this. ------------------------------------------------------------------- DDDD David Kramer http://thekramers.net DK KD DKK D Imagine an alternate history where William S. Burroughs was DK KD actually interested in mainframe hardware design. DDDD Bob Bruhin - Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |