Hehe
@ssa.gov
| reply to N O Y B
Re: ISPs Have Right to Enforce Terms of Service
said by N O Y B  :ISPs have every right to enforce the TOS you have agreed too: 1) by blocking outbound traffic from servers being operated on residential service. 2) by blocking customers who provide their residential service to third parties by hosting and distributing content for them. So get over it and start abiding by the TOS you have agreed too. Then there will be no issue. Bittorrent is a client. If you think of it as a server then many on-line games would also be considered servers.
That is just stupid. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @06:10PM
|
said by Hehe :
Bittorrent is a client. If you think of it as a server then many on-line games would also be considered servers.
That is just stupid.
We have already been down that road in another thread. But whether or not games, browser, etc. are servers is irrelevant to whether or not bit torrents are servers. Which they are. And they violate at least two items in most residential TOS.
|
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| Just remember boys and girls, you can not allow grandma to access your private ftp server to get your vacation movies, you can not BT the new movie trailer to your neighbor, you can not send your new fave song to your girlfriend via AIM/ICQ all because it's against the TOS.
Why do they even give us upstream if they dont want us to push data? ***sarcasm or was it*****
The TOS is written by lawyers with many loopholes that is used to the advantage of the money taker.
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @09:24PM
| said by hopeflicker :Just remember boys and girls, you can not allow grandma to access your private ftp server to get your vacation movies, you can not BT the new movie trailer to your neighbor, you can not send your new fave song to your girlfriend via AIM/ICQ all because it's against the TOS. Why do they even give us upstream if they dont want us to push data? ***sarcasm or was it***** The TOS is written by lawyers with many loopholes that is used to the advantage of the money taker.
So you can upload your content to an appropriate host.
If you do not like your ISPs TOS then why did you agree to them. Try writing your own TOS and see if they will agree to them.
|
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| oh, so now it's an "appropriate host"
So uploading (like in the examples above) is breaking the TOS.
That's nice. 
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @09:50PM
| said by hopeflicker :oh, so now it's an "appropriate host" So uploading (like in the examples above) is breaking the TOS. That's nice.
Always has been about "appropriate host".
When you host content for third parties with your residential service, which is the case with bit torrents, yes that is a violation of TOS.
1) running a server
2) providing the ISPs service to a third party
If you wish to share your content with others upload it to a legitimate hosted server. That way your residential up stream bandwidth gets used only once, even though the content may be viewed/downloaded/accessed/etc. many times by many others.
|
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA | So in my examples above, do they satisfy the "server" definition?
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
|
said by hopeflicker :So in my examples above, do they satisfy the "server" definition?
Be specific to which examples you refer. Restate each specific example.
|
|
Mr Den
join:2006-10-17
Elyria, OH
 ·Windstream
| reply to N O Y B
said by N O Y B :If you do not like your ISPs TOS then why did you agree to them. Sometimes you have to take the only game in town spuds, face it..
No competition in a market unfortunately does not fare well for the consumer. |
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| reply to N O Y B
said by N O Y B :said by hopeflicker :So in my examples above, do they satisfy the "server" definition? Be specific to which examples you refer. Restate each specific example. you can not allow grandma to access your private ftp server to get your vacation movies,
you can not BT the new movie trailer to your neighbor,
you can not send your new fave song to your girlfriend via AIM/ICQ
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 29th, @12:28AM
| said by hopeflicker :(1) you can not allow grandma to access your private ftp server to get your vacation movies, (2) you can not BT the new movie trailer to your neighbor, (3) you can not send your new fave song to your girlfriend via AIM/ICQ (1) Violation of most residential TOS.
Solution: Upload to an appropriate server.
(2) Violation of most residential TOS.
Solution: Upload to an appropriate server.
(3) your girlfriend may be violating her ISPs residential TOS.
Solution: Upload to an appropriate server.
Though technical violations of most ISPs residential TOS, YMMV though in regard to ISP enforcement in the cases above.
Though non of the case above are relevant to whether or not servers are a violation of residential TOS nor whether or not bit torrents are servers.
|
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to Mr Den
said by Mr Den :said by N O Y B :If you do not like your ISPs TOS then why did you agree to them. Sometimes you have to take the only game in town spuds, face it.. No competition in a market unfortunately does not fare well for the consumer.
Does not justify breaching TOS.
|
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| reply to N O Y B
said by N O Y B :said by hopeflicker :(1) you can not allow grandma to access your private ftp server to get your vacation movies, (2) you can not BT the new movie trailer to your neighbor, (3) you can not send your new fave song to your girlfriend via AIM/ICQ (1) Violation of most residential TOS. Solution: Upload to an appropriate server. (2) Violation of most residential TOS. Solution: Upload to an appropriate server. (3) your girlfriend may be violating her ISPs residential TOS. Solution: Upload to an appropriate server. Though technical violations of most ISPs residential TOS, YMMV though in regard to ISP enforcement in the cases above. Though non of the case above are relevant to whether or not servers are a violation of residential TOS nor whether or not bit torrents are servers. You say upload to an appropriate server. What if that option is not avail? Dont say there's many free options. Not everyone knows this.
So technically I can have my internet connection revoked for any of the 3 above examples? Then why do ISPs say "share" videos/pictures and they do not say "You can share pictures as long as you do not use your connection as a server"?
If they do not want you sharing files between 2 residential computers then they should say that in ENGLISH
And this is my whole point: In general, most people break their TOS on their residential connection. Most people dont even know what a TOS is and those that do couldn't careless about a contract that only lawyers can understand. People go around everywhere (especially here at DSLR and ALWAYS use that line, "It's against the TOS to do that", yeah, like it's a law.
TOS is only used by ISPs when it's to their benefit. What is really wrong is they will allow some to break the TOS and not even care but the will turn right around and terminate someone else for doing the same exact violation.
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 29th, @02:05AM
| An appropriate server is available to everyone with internet access. Whether they know or not is irrelevant.
Yes, technically most ISPs have grounds to terminate just about anyone's residential service based on breach of TOS. Obviously it is not in their best interest to strictly enforce. But they have the right to do so if they wish. Apparently in the case of bit torrent servers many of them wish to prevent rather than terminate.
Kind of like some of the laws on the books that are regularly broken but not enforced. But they can be enforced if needed/desired for some end purpose.
They say share videos/pictures because you can do that without breach of TOS. The fact they do not point you to an appropriate server to do this without breach of TOS is irrelevant.
They have said so in English. No servers is pretty clear. Unless you wish to spin it to suite your own interests. However I do not believe that would be successful legal argument if it were to be taken to that.
I have never said TOS is a law. Though it would likely be held up it court as a binding agreement between the ISP and customer.
TOS can also be used by the customer to insure the ISP fulfills their service level commitment to the customer.
If you do not like the TOS cancel your service, work with your ISP to change the TOS, file lawsuit against ISP if you believe they have terminated your service or otherwise are not fulfilling their obligation without just cause. But complaining about it here and arguing with me about it, will not make it change.
|
|
Mr Den
join:2006-10-17
Elyria, OH | reply to N O Y B
If you re-read my reply, you will find I did not make that statement.
I also did not reply to your post to argue with you, just to point out a fact. |
|
