site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
132
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL

From a review....

 

...of the Florida bill, it does appear to be mostly aimed at punishing those who steal service -- expanding the scope of any existing legislation to cover more types of communications services.

The only thing I see thus far is that I figure one could argue that if your cable ISP says to connect multiple systems, they require you purchase the additional IPs, then perhaps owning the NAT router may place you in violation of this bill if you are not paying them for your extra IPs (which of course you really don't "NEED").

Just a thought...

K.
 

--
"We can go from boom to bust, from dreams to a bowl of dust. We can fall from rockets red glare, down to 'Brother can you spare' -- another war -- another waste land -- and another lost generation. . ."


T k

@dslx.net

approval from:
yazdzik See Profile
KrK See Profile

"...of the Florida bill, it does appear to be mostly aimed at punishing those who steal service -- expanding the scope of any existing legislation to cover more types of communications services."

I've gone over both versions of Florida bill. I've discussed the issues with the legislative staff assigned to review the bills. They really missed the boat, but now they're starting to get a clue.

Many.. Many.. Major legal flaws..

The big one.. is "(2)(a)no person shall knowingly, intercept, receive, decrypt, transmit, retransmit, or acquire access to any communications service offered by a cable operator, or any other communications service provider, or knowingly assist others in do so unless specifically authorized to do so by a cable operator or other communications service provider, or as may otherwise be specifically authorized by law."

This clause pretty much wipes out twenty years of telco reform. Since NO communications service I have known, would place their terms in a written document and have it signed by a corporate officer (to be binding).

Likewise virtually all of them have an "we can change these term with no notice" clause. I've also yet to see any terms of service that spell out anything but negatives(can't do this, can't do that, etc). No clauses like.. You can use this service to.. hookup this.. We allow..

So, upon enactment everything in telecom, cable, sat becomes Illegal, until you specific permission otherwise. P.S. Better get that in writing!!

Oh, you'll need a lawyer on retainer if you want to plug that fax machine into the telco jack or install the answering machine which steals revenue from baby bell's voice mail services. The lawyer is needed to sift thru the millions of pages of regulations, tariffs, case law, administrative rulings just to prove you're not guilty.

So for discussion.. I've included some shortly to be illegal activities for your entertainment.

Let a neighbor use your cordless phone to place a call. Jail for both of you!

Add a cable splitter to hook up VCR.. Get your lawyer too start digging up the relevant regulations and case law.

Girlfriend used your internet connection, new abode for the both of you..(slammer)

Forget to make a payment.. You were receiving unauthorized service.. Jail time for you..

As you can see, the criminal scenarios are endless, and unpredictable.

It turns a number of civil actions into criminal behavior, determined by guess who? They are allowing unregulated services to make law. Customer today, felon tomorrow.

They also outlaw possession of communication devices if you're too smart. A new intelligence tax/law/whatever.

"(4)(a) Any person who intentionally possesses a communication device, knowing or having reason to know that the design os such device renders it primarily useful for the purpose of committing or assisting other in committing a violation of paragraph (2)(a) shall be guilty...blah..blah.."

If gets enacted in Florida, I intend to immediately sue the state on several grounds.

1st, Vague and unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority.

2nd, Illegal taking of private property. Since I'm aware of dual use properties of all technology, Cable ready TV's.. splitters, vcrs, antennas, fax machines, modems, answering machines, cordless phones, etc. I will have to give up all teleco, and comm devices. A few million dollars should compensate me for my continuing losses. (I always needed an early retirement plan).

Oh, I also plan to inform the judge and his staff, that they too, will have to give up their telco and comm devices. As they will have been contaminated with dual use knowledge of modern technology.


Monday, 04-Jun 09:33:37 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics