Re: Censorship in America, Part II

["John C. A. Bambenek, GCIH, CISSP" <bambenek.infosec () gmail com>]

Reviewing the Oxford Dictionary of English, censorship does not require that
the censor is governmental.

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Rich Kulawiec <rsk () gsp org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 09:41:20AM -0500, John C. A. Bambenek, GCIH, CISSP
> wrote:
> > See, now this is actually censorship.
>
> No, it's not.
>
> It's odious, stupid, and pointless, but it's not censorship because
> NetSol is a corporation, not a government.  Their customers have
> freely chosen to enter into contracts stipulating whatever one-sided
> terms-of-service NetSol has this week and to thereby subject themselves
> to the inconsistent, bungled enforcement of same.  (I'm sure NetSol's
> landsharks have already made certain that this action is consistent with
> those contractual provisions.  IANAL, but the excerpts I've seen boil
> down to "we can do whatever we want whenever we want and no, we don't
> have to inform you or explain it to you or give you your money back.")
>
> Astute followup traffic on IP suggests that NetSol has more of a problem
> with websites about movies than with websites that actually advocate
> killing people.  I'll suggest that anyone using NetSol for domain
> registration, DNS, or hosting is clueless.
>
> ---Rsk
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.