> Larry J. Blunk wrote: > > > > I'm not trying to justify allowing the use of NAT where it is > > prohibited by a terms of service agreement and thus grounds for > > termination of service. However, going beyond termination of > > service and making this an illegal act under law (possibly > > punishable by a felony conviction and 4 years in prison) is an > > entirely different case. If you stop paying your ISP bill > > (thus getting several months for free until the ISP cuts you > > off) wouldn't that also be theft of service? Should one > > also be subject to a felony conviction and 4 years of prison for > > such an act? > > If it takes a few months for the ISP to cut you off for not paying your > bill, that is their own fault. Concerning someone going to jail for > running NAT in breach of TOS, I find it supportable. There is precedence > set with the Cable companies (using equipment to allow service to be > used on more than tv's than allowed by the cable company would be > equivelent here). > > -Jack
Sigh. My point is this is a question of extremes and punishment commensurate with the "crime". I can understand how one could consider NAT to be "theft" under a terms of service agreement. I can even understand how one might think this should be a criminal offense (although I would disagree - consider how many ISP's consider NAT to be perfectly acceptable). However, going beyond a misdemeanor offense and a fine - advocating prison time and felony convictions - is something I simply can't understand or find supportable.