nanog mailing list archives
Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity
From: "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." <amitchell () isipp com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 10:23:23 -0600
Suresh wrote:
The debate is dominated by the parties of the first part unfortunately (and add professors of law to this already toxic mix)
Ahem. I resemble that remark. Anne Anne P. Mitchell, Attorney at Law CEO/President Institute for Social Internet Public Policy Member, Cal. Bar Cyberspace Law Committee Author: Section 6 of the Federal CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 Ret. Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of San Jose
Current thread:
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity, (continued)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matt Palmer (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matt Palmer (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Richard Bennett (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matt Palmer (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Owen DeLong (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Richard Bennett (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Larry Sheldon (Jul 29)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jul 26)