From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 4eeddb2f150706ef1931502fbf7b2fbb8432bfdbaf7ba90b0935aba5949ebba4
Message ID: <Pine.GUL.3.93.960625113555.328B-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply To: <31CEC5B3.7C19@worldnet.att.net>
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-26 01:22:42 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:22:42 +0800
From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:22:42 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: AT&T bans anonymous messages
In-Reply-To: <31CEC5B3.7C19@worldnet.att.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.93.960625113555.328B-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Mon, 24 Jun 1996, WorldNet User wrote:
> AT&T WorldNet service has banned the sending of anonymous email or
> posting anonymously.
>
> >From the "AT&T WorldNet Service Operating Policies":
>
> (i) Members may not post or transmit any message
> anonymously or under a false name. Members may
> not permit any other person (other than an agent
> acting on Member's behalf and subject to Member's
> supervision) to access the Service Member's
> account for any purpose.
I don't have a problem with this, actually, and a brief visit to
news.admin.net-abuse.misc would show why. AT&T is selling you access under a
given username. If you send a message traceable to AT&T, they are held
accountable. I think it's reasonable for them to demand that you make
messages traceable to yourself so that you are held accountable.
If AT&T bans or monitors access to anonymous remailers, then that's a
different kettle of fish entirely, but they're not doing that. The policy
above allows you to send a message to an anonymous remailer under your own
name.
> The no anon rule even beat the no indecency rule, which is second:
I disagree. The below is outrageous.
> (ii) Members may not post or transmit any message
> which is libelous, defamatory or which discloses
> private or personal matters concerning any person.
> Members may not post or transmit any message,
> data, image or program which is indecent, obscene
> or pornographic.
>
> http://www.worldnet.att.net/care/terms/#oppol
"Discloses private or personal matters concerning any person"? I guess any
discussion of political figures is out.
-rich
http://www.c2.org/~rich/
Return to June 1996
Return to “WorldNet User <anonymous-user@worldnet.att.net>”