[lug] [OT] Qwest's changes Subscriber Agreement...

[Bear Giles]

I can look abusive up in Black's.  (It doesn't have a definition for 
"hateful.")  But that doesn't answer the question.  Obviously a "harmful 
act" is fairly well defined.  But what's "improper, hurtful, offensive 
[or] reproachful" in the definition of "abusive"?  That gets you into 
community standards.

More than anything else I'm reminded of the attempts to infantize the 
entire net to the point where you can leave an unattended 5 year old at 
the keyboard.  (Personally I think it's the 9 year olds that you gotta 
watch out for.)   Time is irrelevant on the net, but manner and place 
are still important considerations so if that's respected (e.g., no sex 
talk on the Disney forums) I can't think of anything other than slander 
and criminal solicitation (as in "I want to whack my husband", not "I 
want to whack you off") that need to be blocked.  And those are actually 
criminal "harmful acts", not just offensive words.

Bear

Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:13:02PM -0700, Bear Giles wrote:
> 
>>Look at the corner cases in the AUP.  What's "hateful" or "abusive" 
> 
> 
> By those, they would mean the standard legal definition of those words.
> You can find more details about what might qualify by looking in a legal
> dictionary.
> 
> Thanks,
> Sean