<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;Re: verizon&#x27; in forum &#x27;&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21652384</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:01:33 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:01:33 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: verizon</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21775162</link>
<description><![CDATA[hihi9 posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/431600" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=431600');">FDM80</a>:</small><br><br>I think the reason verizon isn't playing along is that they know that if they do, they will end up footing the bill for being the police.<br><br>Unless the RIAA finds a way  to make the ISPs play along and not burden them with additional costs then I don't see the ISPs cooperating.<br> </div>You got to be pretty arrogant and greedy to play along with these big boy called riaa,mpaa <br>remember riaa and mpaa are actually run by the same group of ppl so don't think they are separate entity<br>isn't it obvious?<br>greed breeds corruption<br>winner takes all, loser have nothing :(]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21775162</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:10:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: verizon</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21761725</link>
<description><![CDATA[arthurmnev posted : oh oh ... illegal wiretapping. Not engaging into the conversation about the wiretaps that saved Brooklyn Bridge in NYC (among many other things). Verizon is not doing it for customers, they are doing it because once you agree to something you will end up owning it. And they dont want to own it.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21761725</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 01:58:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: verizon</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21655188</link>
<description><![CDATA[mOjO_420 posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/431600" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=431600');">FDM80</a>:</small><br><br>I think the reason verizon isn't playing along is that they know that if they do, they will end up footing the bill for being the police.</div>I disagree.  When the Post-911 illegal wiretapping started Verizon resisted then too. Of course they were bullied into it anyway but they were the only one of the big dogs to put up a fight even.  You could not call that a profit-driven move.  One could argue that it was for PR purposes but I generally think that Verizon is one of the few that believes in civil rights and privacy at some level.  How deep that goes is the question...]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21655188</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 10:39:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: verizon</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21653161</link>
<description><![CDATA[FDM80 posted : I think the reason verizon isn't playing along is that they know that if they do, they will end up footing the bill for being the police.<br><br>Unless the RIAA finds a way  to make the ISPs play along and not burden them with additional costs then I don't see the ISPs cooperating.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21653161</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:27:44 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: verizon</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21652619</link>
<description><![CDATA[snipper_cr posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/919881" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=919881');">cybercrimes</a>:</small><br><br>The report does note that Verizon, who has traditionally shied away from playing Internet babysitter, so far has no plans to play along. Some of you might recall that Verizon has battled the RIAA previously over being forced to play content police<br><br>im happy im with verizon<br> </div>I remember quite a few years ago, when the scortched earth practice started, and the AAs started going to the ISPs for customer information, verizon was one of the first to really stand up and protect their customers legal rights. Not to say that others didn't, but they were featured doing it mroe.<br><small>--<br>The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.<br>PPL/CPL:IA;ASEL/AMEL. CFI:ASEL</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-verizon-21652619</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:23:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>verizon</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/verizon-21652384</link>
<description><![CDATA[cybercrimes posted : The report does note that Verizon, who has traditionally shied away from playing Internet babysitter, so far has no plans to play along. Some of you might recall that Verizon has battled the RIAA previously over being forced to play content police<br><br>im happy im with verizon]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/verizon-21652384</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 18:31:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

