After all, it worked for Napster....
Scott Helms On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 3:23 PM John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote: > In article <af762f22-9431-4137-b87e-2444a62bdd87@Spark> you write: > >-=-=-=-=-=- > > > >feeling cranky, are we, job? (accusing an antispam expert of spamming > on a mailing list by having too long a .sig?) > >but it’s true! anne runs the internet, and the rest of us (except for > ICANN GAC representatives) all accept that. > > > >to actually try to make a more substantial point, i am quite curious how > the AUPs of carriers try to disallow > >bandwidth resale while permitting > > > >• cybercafe operations and other “free wifi" (where internet service > might be provided for patrons in a > >hotel or cafe) > >• wireless access point schemes where you make money or get credit for > allowing use of your bandwidth (e.g. Fon) > >• other proxy services that use bandwidth such as tor exit nodes and > openvpn gateways > > To belabor the fairly obvious, residential and business service are > different even if the technology is the same. For example, Comcast's > residential TOS says: > > You agree that the Service(s) and the Xfinity Equipment will be used > only for personal, residential, non-commercial purposes, unless > otherwise specifically authorized by us in writing. You are prohibited > from reselling or permitting another to resell the Service(s) in whole > or in part, ... [ long list of other forbidden things ] > > Their business TOS is different. It says no third party use unless > your agreement permits it, so I presume they have a coffee shop plan. > (The agreements don't seem to be on their web site.) I'd also observe > that coffee shop wifi isn't "resale" since it's free, it's an amenity. > > As to how do these guys think they'll get away with it, my guess is > that they heard that "disruption" means ignoring laws and contracts > and someone told them that is a good thing. > > R's, > John >