Re: Packetstream - how does this not violate just about every provider's ToS?

[Mel Beckman <mel () beckman org>]

Anne,

With all due respect, you haven’t yet cited an example of an ISP TOS at “every provider” that this new company’s 
product violates. I’m not asking you to critique TORs, I’m asking that you tell us the TOS restriction that you believe 
is so obvious to everyone? Because it’s not obvious to me, and I own an ISP. 

-mel via cell

> On Apr 26, 2019, at 7:41 AM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell () isipp com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 26, 2019, at 6:10 AM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew () matthew at> wrote:
> >
> > So providers should stamp this out (because it is “bad”) and support customers who are running TOR nodes (because 
> > those are “good”). Did I get that right?
>
> If that is how you see it, then it's right for you.  At no time did I mention TOR, nor will I get dragged into that 
> discussion.
>
> Anne
>
> Attorney at Law
> GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
> Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
> Legislative Consultant
> CEO/President, Institute for Social Internet Public Policy
> Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
> Board of Directors, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
> Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute
> Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS
> California Bar Association
> Cal. Bar Cyberspace Law Committee
> Colorado Cyber Committee
> Ret. Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of San Jose