Re: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes blacklisting spammers

[Bryan Taylor <bryan_w_taylor(at)yahoo.com>]

--- Jeme A Brelin <jeme@brelin.net> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, D. C. Sessions wrote:
> > There is not one ISP in the USA which is a common carrier.
> > Common-carrier status is not something that just happens; it results
> > from explicit action.
> 
> My former employer, Electric Lightwave, Inc., spoke regularly of their
> "common carrier status" in both their telephone and data network
> businesses.

Here is a web page that argues against filtering based on common carrier
principles. 
http://www.provider.com/blocking_spam_.htm

The author clearly acknowledges "Obviously this is not the current prevailing
state of FCC or Congressional regulation."

The Common Carrier statuts (in Title 47 of the US Code) are here:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/47/chapters/5/subchapters/ii/parts/i/toc.html

In fact, I think the entire blacklisting question reduces to whether you think
that ISP's should be common carriers. If so, then nondiscriminatory principles
while counsel against blacklisting. If not, not.

I believe that the current law is that ISP's generally are not common carriers.
I would classify this as garden variety commerce regulation, meaning that they
have the power to decide the issue, but until/unless they do ISP's are not
bound by the common carrier restrictions.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com