Re: Parler

[Paul Timmins <paul () telcodata us>]

"You have to let your customer's services contain death threats against 
the owner of your company or we'll blacklist you" is the wildest take of 
2021 yet.

Blocking Amazon because of who they allow to remain a customer is 
something I wholeheartedly encourage my competitors to do.

On 1/12/21 9:29 AM, Kevin McCormick wrote:
> Imagine if Tier 1 ISPs had a censorship free clause that required 
> companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Amazon to provide services free 
> of censorship or have IP blocks blackholed. They would lose hundreds 
> of millions of dollars per day. I bet they would reverse their tone in 
> a hurry.
>
> https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/idaho-internet-provider-to-block-facebook-twitter-over-their-trump-bans/
>
> Thank you,
>
> Kevin McCormick
>
> *From:*NANOG <nanog-bounces+kmccormick=mdtc.net () nanog org> *On Behalf 
> Of *mark seery
> *Sent:* Sunday, January 10, 2021 8:06 PM
> *To:* K. Scott Helms <kscott.helms () gmail com>
> *Cc:* NANOG Operators' Group <nanog () nanog org>
> *Subject:* Re: Parler
>
> I assume multiple networks/ ISPs that have acceptable use policies 
> that call out criminality and incitement to violence, for example:
>
> https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/comcast-acceptable-use-policy
>
> Have these AUPs been invoked previously for these reasons, or would 
> that be new territory?
>
> Sent from Mobile Device
>
>
>
>     On Jan 10, 2021, at 2:52 PM, K. Scott Helms
>     <kscott.helms () gmail com <mailto:kscott.helms () gmail com>> wrote:
>
>     
>
>     Right, it's not a list for content hosting.
>
>     Scott Helms
>
>     On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 5:42 PM <sronan () ronan-online com
>     <mailto:sronan () ronan-online com>> wrote:
>
>         No, this is a list for Network Operators.
>
>         Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>             On Jan 10, 2021, at 5:32 PM, K. Scott Helms
>             <kscott.helms () gmail com <mailto:kscott.helms () gmail com>>
>             wrote:
>
>             
>
>             This is a list for pushing bits.  The fact that many/most
>             of us have other businesses doesn't make this an
>             appropriate forum for SIP issues (to use my own work as an
>             example).
>
>             On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 4:52 PM <sronan () ronan-online com
>             <mailto:sronan () ronan-online com>> wrote:
>
>                 This is a list for Network Operators, AWS certainly
>                 operates networks.
>
>                 Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>                     On Jan 10, 2021, at 4:27 PM, K. Scott Helms
>                     <kscott.helms () gmail com
>                     <mailto:kscott.helms () gmail com>> wrote:
>
>                     
>
>                     No,
>
>                     It really does not.  Section 230 only applies to
>                     publishers, and not to network providers.  If this
>                     were a cloud hosting provider list then you'd be
>                     correct, but as a network provider's list it does
>                     not belong here.
>
>
>                     Scott Helms
>
>                     On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 3:21 PM Lady Benjamin PD
>                     Cannon <ben () 6by7 net <mailto:ben () 6by7 net>> wrote:
>
>                         As network operations and
>                         compute/cloud/hosting operations continue to
>                         coalesce, I very much disagree with you. 
>                         Section 230 is absolutely relevant, this
>                         discussion is timely and relevant, and it
>                         directly affects me as both a telecom and
>                         cloud compute/services provider.
>
>                         —L.B.
>
>                         Lady Benjamin PD Cannon, ASCE
>
>                         6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC
>
>                         CEO
>
>                         ben () 6by7 net <mailto:ben () 6by7 net>
>
>                         "The only fully end-to-end encrypted global
>                         telecommunications company in the world.”
>
>                         FCC License KJ6FJJ
>
>
>
>                         <Speedtest9118.png>
>
>                         <Ben LIC.png>
>
>
>
>                             On Jan 10, 2021, at 12:13 PM, K. Scott
>                             Helms <kscott.helms () gmail com
>                             <mailto:kscott.helms () gmail com>> wrote:
>
>                             It's not, and frankly it's disappointing
>                             to see people pushing an agenda here.
>
>
>                             Scott Helms
>
>
>                             On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 9:37 AM
>                             <sronan () ronan-online com
>                             <mailto:sronan () ronan-online com>> wrote:
>
>
>                                 NANOG is a group of Operators,
>                                 discussion does not have to be about
>                                 networking. I have already explained
>                                 how this represents a significant
>                                 issue for Network Operators.
>
>                                 On Jan 10, 2021, at 9:09 AM, Mike
>                                 Bolitho <mikebolitho () gmail com
>                                 <mailto:mikebolitho () gmail com>> wrote:
>
>                                 
>                                 It has nothing to do with networking.
>                                 Their decision was necessarily
>                                 political. If you can specifically
>                                 bring up an issue, beyond speculative,
>                                 on how their new chosen CDN is somehow
>                                 now causing congestion or routing
>                                 issues on the public internet, then
>                                 great. But as of now, that isn't even
>                                 a thing. It's just best to leave it
>                                 alone because it will devolve into chaos.
>
>                                 - Mike Bolitho
>
>                                 On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 6:54 AM
>                                 <sronan () ronan-online com
>                                 <mailto:sronan () ronan-online com>> wrote:
>
>
>                                     Why? This is extremely relevant to
>                                     network operators and is not
>                                     political at all.
>
>                                     On Jan 10, 2021, at 8:51 AM, Mike
>                                     Bolitho <mikebolitho () gmail com
>                                     <mailto:mikebolitho () gmail com>> wrote:
>
>                                     
>                                     Can we please not go down this
>                                     rabbit hole on here? List admins?
>
>                                     - Mike Bolitho
>
>                                     On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 1:26 AM
>                                     William Herrin <bill () herrin us
>                                     <mailto:bill () herrin us>> wrote:
>
>
>                                         Anybody looking for a new
>                                         customer opportunity? It seems
>                                         Parler is in
>                                         search of a new service
>                                         provider. Vendors need only
>                                         provide all the
>                                         proprietary AWS APIs that
>                                         Parler depends upon to function.
>
>                                         https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/09/amazon-parler-suspension/
>
>                                         Regards,
>                                         Bill HErrin