Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police

[Shawn McMahon <smcmahon () eiv com>]

On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 10:56:18AM -0800, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> You missed the point. The filters were removed the moment we were able to
> get a suitably authorized NOC tech (next morning). That didn't change the
> fact that I incurred losses from paying three expensive contractors, for a
> full night of over-time, as a direct result of the unannounced filter. The
> contractors got paid, how do I recover the losses caused by the contract
> breach? The upstream refuses, therefore we must go to court.

Are you going to court?  Have you gone to court, or are you just
blowing smoke here?  I keep asking this question, and you keep skirting
the answer.  Gimme a yes or no, Roeland, please.

BTW, you miss something; even if you go to court and they settle with
you, it's cheaper for them than leaving the stinking ports open by
default.  That'll cost them a lot more hours for a lot more techs.

Oh; and it shouldn't have taken that long to figure out what was up.
Your contractors suck; get new ones.

Attachment: _bin
Description: