On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> * John Kozubik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-08-02 19:27]:
> >
> > That is incorrect. AOL owns their network, and they can respond to your
> > arbitrary communications on their network in any way they see fit.
>
&
ore - they broke their agreement. However, I'll bet
if you read _all_ the fine print, somewhere there exists in the
contract/agreement a provision for just that.
-
John Kozubik - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.kozubik.com
erty owners.
It is difficult to imagine how "blah blah employee number four Sun
Microsystems blah blah" is capable of this kind of cognitive dissonance.
(*) Within the bounds of the law. Please don't respond with ridiculous
queries: "can BA murder you on the plane?!" "can BA rape you?!"
-
John Kozubik - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.kozubik.com
ne man not to take his meds in
order to stand trial (a recent court case whose outcome I do not know).
Along this line, perhaps a more general anti-tampering ammendment could
include protection against the coercion that you describe above. I feel
that no parent should be forced to alter their chil
