Re: Bunt v. Tiley & Others


"Guy Fawkes" <davenull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1143652680.248445.52010@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<fnuh> wrote:
"the injunction sought in the case (to prevent the ISPs providing
services to the individuals) would be "draconian and pointless"

Was all I was ever interested in. Person A cannot deny person B
access to the internet because person A "demands" it from an ISP

I knew the case against the ISPs had no merit from the off.

This is why you are a knob, you only think of your own immediate
interests.

You are such a Knob!

And you took on the ISPs for the good of us all? I don't think so as you
believed ISPs would all be dropping NNTP as as consequence of your actions

There is a good analogy here to motor vehicles and the roads.

If you cannot control the car manufacturer in order to control the
abusive minority who will not stop using vehicles in the comission of
crime, you have no other option but to regulate drivers.

Ford doesn't care about your licence fee going up and becoming a back
door ID card.

Why are your analogys so fucking stupid, do you belive that gun makers
should be charged as murders when they are used in unlaqfull killings? Thats
what you are saying with your analogy.

The ISP's won't care when the inevitable final result of this decision
is a mandatory european internet driving licence, and of course
tracking.

You will.

Governments are controlling our daily lives more and more your little
frivolous case has no bearing

You much vaunted (and largely imaginary) anonymity will no longer be
hard to achieve, it will be illegal to attempt.

You are the one who's more upset about loosing atomicity.


.

Quantcast