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

[Job Snijders <job () instituut net>]

Dear Anne,

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:07:51PM -0600, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
> How can this not be a violation of the ToS of just about every major provider? 

Can you perhaps cite ToS excerpts from one or more major providers to
support your assertion?

> Anne P. Mitchell, 
> 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
> Legal Counsel: The Earth Law Center
> California Bar Association
> Cal. Bar Cyberspace Law Committee
> Colorado Cyber Committee
> Ret. Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of San Jose
> Ret. Chair, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop

Are you listing all the above because you are presenting a formal
position supported by all these organisations about ToS? Can you for
instance clarify how signing of as a director for the Denver Internet
Exchange shapes the context of your ToS message?

Or, perhaps you are listing the above for some kind of self-marketing
purposes? If that is the case, please note that it is fairly uncommon to
use the NANOG mailing list to distribute resumes. I know numerous
websites dedicated to the dissemination of work histories, perhaps you
can use those instead of operational mailling list?

Regards,

Job

ps. RFC 3676 section 4.3