On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 23:53 +0100, Danny Froberg wrote: > People are way to bored ;)
Well it did have implications on voip businesses until jermey had to get involved, then it degreaded. The specific voip implications were the comments about the case law (meaning judges decided this not me, I only happen to share their opinions) that in the US at least 18 USC 1030 provides not only criminal but also civil remedies for a violation of a TOS. Something that can come in handy if you have a customer that decides to violate said TOS. The post patriot act version added a provision that the computers in question do not have to be in the US to qualify, they only have to be involved in interstate or foreign commerce or communications with a US based system *somewhere*. I think this is overreaching, and the constitution allows the feds to pass laws that are involved in interstate or foreign commerce but says nothing about communication. Although no one has been charged to date (at least nothing that can be cited) with communication only, the juridisctional hook has always been commerce, so in effect that part has never been challenged ... And to make jermey happy no I am not a lawyer, I never claimed to be all of this is clearly readable by googling cases based on this, subscribing to westlaw, etc. If you want more help contact a lawyer, he can search for those same cases and I will even help. The first case that set the violation of a TOS was a violation of 1030 was "In Re: America Online Inc." 1998 VA district court (went for appeal later, affirmed) The damage provision is largely US v Middleton 9th circuit, which has been used in other circuits across the nation. The post patriot act version actually changes this slightly but the underlying concept still applies. Specifically the patriot act states that a failed attempt to violate 1030 is the same as a success, and in reality the 'victim' only has to claim that the damage element would have been reached and a jury believe the 'victim'. Secondly aggregation changes, instead of it being a singular act (as the senate report on the initial statute clearly stated) all acts within 1 year are aggregated, so its really easy to hit the damage element. Those two cases should make it really easy for any legal counsel to prove or disprove anything said, and with westlaws sheppard series its really easy to see if they were overturned or not. Should take a whole of about 15 minutes for a lawyer to verify this, at least that is what it took when I went to law school. -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel UK +44 870 340 4605 Germany +49 801 777 555 3402 US +1 360 207 0479 or +1 516 687 5200 FreeWorldDialup: 635378 http://www.sacaug.org/ Sacramento Asterisk Users Group
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Asterisk-Biz mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
