Re: ISP Responsibilities [WAS: Re: Nato warns of strike against cyber attackers]

[Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon () cox net>]

On 6/9/2010 07:39, Jorge Amodio wrote:
> > 1. Should ISPs be responsible for abuse from within their customer base?
>
> Not sure, ISPs role is just to move packets from A to B, you need to
> clearly define what constitutes abuse and how much of it is considered
> a crime.
>
> If I call your home every five minutes to harass you over the phone is
> AT&T responsible ?
>
> > 1a. If so, how?
>
> Pull the plug without looking at how much you are billing.

I'd say pull the plug while watching the balance sheet.

I have no idea how many providers of netnews service there are left--not
many because they waited for somebody else to solve the problems.  I
subscribe to one that rigorously polices spam and troll traffic (from
their own customers _and_from_the_world).

And for less than some of the other services.  (They are associated with
a German University, I think, so there may be a subsidy issue.  I would
pay several times as much as I do for the service--maybe an order of
magnitude more.)

> What incentive they have to do so ? and how liable they become if do
> something without a court order or such ?

Is "survival" an incentive?

> > Providers in the U.S. are the worst offenders of hosting/accommodating
> > criminal activities by Eastern European criminals. Period.
>
> Probably true, here money talks.

But it doesn't listen.  It waits for the bailout.

-- 
Somebody should have said:
A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.

Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting
the vote.

Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca

ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml