Re: State Super-DMCA Too True

["Larry J. Blunk" <ljb () merit edu>]

> Larry J. Blunk wrote:
> >    I'm not trying to justify allowing the use of NAT where it is
> > prohibited by a terms of service agreement and thus grounds for
> > termination of service.   However, going beyond termination of
> > service and making this an illegal act under law (possibly
> > punishable by a felony conviction and 4 years in prison) is an
> > entirely different case.  If you stop paying your ISP bill 
> > (thus getting several months for free until the ISP cuts you
> > off) wouldn't that also be theft of service?  Should one
> > also be subject to a felony conviction and 4 years of prison for
> > such an act?
>
> If it takes a few months for the ISP to cut you off for not paying your 
> bill, that is their own fault. Concerning someone going to jail for 
> running NAT in breach of TOS, I find it supportable. There is precedence 
> set with the Cable companies (using equipment to allow service to be 
> used on more than tv's than allowed by the cable company would be 
> equivelent here).
>
> -Jack


  Sigh.  My point is this is a question of extremes and punishment
commensurate with the "crime".   I can understand how one could
consider NAT to be "theft" under a terms of service agreement.  I
can even understand how one might think this should be a criminal
offense (although I would disagree - consider how many ISP's
consider NAT to be perfectly acceptable).   However, going beyond a
misdemeanor offense and a fine - advocating prison time and felony
convictions - is something I simply can't understand or find
supportable.