|
Reader's Favorites
Media Casualties Mount Administration Split On Europe Invasion Administration In Crisis Over Burgeoning Quagmire Congress Concerned About Diversion From War On Japan Pot, Kettle On Line Two... Allies Seize Paris The Natural Gore Book Sales Tank, Supporters Claim Unfair Tactics Satan Files Lack Of Defamation Suit Why This Blog Bores People With Space Stuff A New Beginning My Hit Parade
Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds) Tim Blair James Lileks Bleats Virginia Postrel Kausfiles Winds Of Change (Joe Katzman) Little Green Footballs (Charles Johnson) Samizdata Eject Eject Eject (Bill Whittle) Space Alan Boyle (MSNBC) Space Politics (Jeff Foust) Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey) NASA Watch NASA Space Flight Hobby Space A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold) Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore) Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust) Mars Blog The Flame Trench (Florida Today) Space Cynic Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing) COTS Watch (Michael Mealing) Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington) Selenian Boondocks Tales of the Heliosphere Out Of The Cradle Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar) True Anomaly Kevin Parkin The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster) Spacecraft (Chris Hall) Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher) Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche) Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer) Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers) Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement) Spacearium Saturn Follies JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell) Science
Nanobot (Howard Lovy) Lagniappe (Derek Lowe) Geek Press (Paul Hsieh) Gene Expression Carl Zimmer Redwood Dragon (Dave Trowbridge) Charles Murtaugh Turned Up To Eleven (Paul Orwin) Cowlix (Wes Cowley) Quark Soup (Dave Appell) Economics/Finance
Assymetrical Information (Jane Galt and Mindles H. Dreck) Marginal Revolution (Tyler Cowen et al) Man Without Qualities (Robert Musil) Knowledge Problem (Lynne Kiesling) Journoblogs The Ombudsgod Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett) Joanne Jacobs The Funny Pages
Cox & Forkum Day By Day Iowahawk Happy Fun Pundit Jim Treacher IMAO The Onion Amish Tech Support (Lawrence Simon) Scrapple Face (Scott Ott) Regular Reading
Quasipundit (Adragna & Vehrs) England's Sword (Iain Murray) Daily Pundit (Bill Quick) Pejman Pundit Daimnation! (Damian Penny) Aspara Girl Flit Z+ Blog (Andrew Zolli) Matt Welch Ken Layne The Kolkata Libertarian Midwest Conservative Journal Protein Wisdom (Jeff Goldstein et al) Dean's World (Dean Esmay) Yippee-Ki-Yay (Kevin McGehee) Vodka Pundit Richard Bennett Spleenville (Andrea Harris) Random Jottings (John Weidner) Natalie Solent On the Third Hand (Kathy Kinsley, Bellicose Woman) Patrick Ruffini Inappropriate Response (Moira Breen) Jerry Pournelle Other Worthy Weblogs
Ain't No Bad Dude (Brian Linse) Airstrip One A libertarian reads the papers Andrew Olmsted Anna Franco Review Ben Kepple's Daily Rant Bjorn Staerk Bitter Girl Catallaxy Files Dawson.com Dodgeblog Dropscan (Shiloh Bucher) End the War on Freedom Fevered Rants Fredrik Norman Heretical Ideas Ideas etc Insolvent Republic of Blogistan James Reuben Haney Libertarian Rant Matthew Edgar Mind over what matters Muslimpundit Page Fault Interrupt Photodude Privacy Digest Quare Rantburg Recovering Liberal Sand In The Gears(Anthony Woodlief) Sgt. Stryker The Blogs of War The Fly Bottle The Illuminated Donkey Unqualified Offerings What she really thinks Where HipHop & Libertarianism Meet Zem : blog Space Policy Links
Space Future The Space Review The Space Show Space Frontier Foundation Space Policy Digest BBS AWOL
USS Clueless (Steven Den Beste) Media Minder Unremitting Verse (Will Warren) World View (Brink Lindsay) The Last Page More Than Zero (Andrew Hofer) Pathetic Earthlings (Andrew Lloyd) Spaceship Summer (Derek Lyons) The New Space Age (Rob Wilson) Rocketman (Mark Oakley) Mazoo Site designed by Powered by Movable Type |
Stifling Of Dissent At AT&T? If true, this is of particular concern to me: AT&T has rolled out new Terms of Service for its DSL service that leave plenty of room for interpretation. From our reading of it, in concert with several others, what we see is a ToS that attempts to give AT&T the right to disconnect its own customers who criticize the company on blogs or in other online settings. My DSL service is with Bellsouth, which recently was reabsorbed into the AT&T borg collective. So if they're serious about this, they could in fact choke off my tube to the Interweb. After all, when one Googles Bellsouth DNS Problems," one of my posts comes up number two. Same thing with my complaints about "Bellsouth Usenet Problems." And don't even get me started on email. So, yeah, I'm concerned, I guess, but as the article points out, it wouldn't be very good PR for them to cut off service to critics (particularly when the criticism is completely legitimate). But I also have a problem with the article: There's nothing which guarantees that what AT&T is doing here is either legal or what the company intends. This wouldn't be the first time that poorly thought-out legal language made it into a contract used by a major corporation. Why are we thinking it's an oversight? Simple: we believe that AT&T isn't misguided enough to expect to be able to squash First Amendment rights with a ToS contract without losing both face and their cozy legal status. Apparently, very few people understand the First Amendment, at least insofar as it protects speech rights. Ahmadinejad had no First Amendment right to speak at Columbia, and he had no First Amendment right to not be criticized, either before, during or after his speech. And I have no First Amendment right to AT&T DSL service, or to not have it cut off if I express an opinion over its tubes. All that the First Amendment says is that "Congress shall make no law," not "Columbia University will grant a podium and audience," or "AT&T shall provide Internet service regardless of the behavior of the customer." AT&T has a right to do this, but as is often the case, what it has a legal right to do wouldn't necessarily be right. And I would hope that they don't do it, both for their sake and mine. [Update on Wednesday morning] For what it's worth, AT&T says not to worry: "AT&T respects its subscribers' rights to voice their opinions and concerns over any matter they wish. However, we retain the right to disassociate ourselves from websites and messages explicitly advocating violence, or any message that poses a threat to children (e.g. child pornography or exploitation). We do not terminate customer service solely because a customer speaks negatively about AT&T. This policy is not new and it's not unique to AT&T." I kind of assumed that was the real intent. Posted by Rand Simberg at October 02, 2007 11:46 AMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.transterrestrial.com/mt-diagnostics.cgi/8291 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference this post from Transterrestrial Musings.
Comments
Am I mistaken in believing that AT&T is still considered to be a "Common Carrier". If so then they are subject to the PSC rules - at least here in Florida - probably similar elsewhere. By local and state government restricting competitors rights-of-way, AT&T has been handed a monopoly on communications. If the state continues to maintain massive barriers against the entry of other carriers, AT&T must be regulated as a coercive monopoly and the public allowed open access. Posted by at October 2, 2007 03:10 PMIts okay, if AT&T tries to shut you down for the naughty things you say, then just blame it on Tourrets disorder. Posted by Josh Reiter at October 2, 2007 08:19 PMYears ago, in the age of dial-up, I got an offer in the mail to change my ISP to AT&T. I read through all the boilerplate and found that, by my reading, they claimed that I granted them a copyright license, including reselling rights, to anything that went over their network, including private email. I called their sales rep and asked if my interpretation was correct. He never got back to me. For whatever reason, they're still doing it. The lawyers write the most one-sided contract they can (their job) and management doesn't seem to have nerve enough to overrule them, even when it's obviously over the top. I guess unless they can see a direct linkage to their bottom line, they won't. And this is at&t, the behemoth. Even if there is a direct linkage, they'll miss it. Posted by bud at October 3, 2007 04:26 PMI vaguely remeber what Bud is saying about the old AT&T Dial-up contracts. However, the thought accurs to me that if they force the copyright issue and the right to re-sell the stuff on their network then they are assuming responsibility for the content. So, Lets see a good State or US Attorney go after them because they own all the scams, kiddie-porn etc on their network. Let's see how fast their lawyers would wqriggle to get out of that one! Who knows - it might form the basis for a "Reality" TV show! Posted by Andy Clark at October 4, 2007 04:27 AMBeautiful girls don't mind being a porn star. Yet the ugly cried that it's women's exploitation. Why? Posted by Jim Thio at November 4, 2007 06:30 PMPost a comment |