POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : The EU and the "Telecoms Package" directives : Re: The EU and the "Telecoms Package" directives Server Time
6 Sep 2024 07:15:54 EDT (-0400)
  Re: The EU and the "Telecoms Package" directives  
From: Warp
Date: 21 Apr 2009 06:17:55
Message: <49ed9d53@news.povray.org>
scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> >  If an ISP started censoring all websites related to a political party,
> > should they be allowed to do that? What if all the ISPs started blocking
> > all political parties except one? Should they be allowed to do that?

> It wouldn't be very popular, but IMO it shouldn't be illegal.

  I suppose you are entitled to your opinion. However, I would at least
hope that that kind of behavior from the part of ISPs would be highly
illegal in most civilized countries.

>  An ISP is 
> just providing you a service for money, they should be legally allowed to 
> offer whatever service they want, whether they only give you access to 1 
> website, 1000, half, 99% or 100% of them.  The ISP business is open and 
> follows market demands, they will provide for whatever the customers want.

  Just because an ISP is providing a service for money does not mean they
can break the law.

  If an ISP started silently "offering" its clients a rootkit adware, that
would likely be highly illegal in most countries. This even if their
client contract specifically stated that the client allows the ISP to do
so. Even signed contracts do not overrule law.

  There's a limit of what a company can do, even if it's completely with
their own property.

> >  No, they don't have the right to actively censor information which would
> > otherwise be available.

> The point is it *wouldn't* otherwise be available, the ISP is providing you 
> a service which you are paying for, if you don't pay for it you don't get 
> access to the information at all.

  You are still nitpicking rather than discussing what I said.

>  How does your "human right for all 
> information" work with half the population who can't even afford a computer, 
> yet alone an internet connection?

  Is someone actively censoring information from them? Is someone actually
spending money to stop those people from getting the information?

  Maybe the word "active censorship" is incorrect, as I'm not a native
speaker. Can you suggest a better expression? (Because I'm certain you
really understand what I'm talking about.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.