Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Censorship Your Rights Online

Verizon Changes FiOS AUP, -1, Offtopic 560

Posted by timothy
from the get-ready-for-municipal-broadband dept.
RasputinAXP writes "Verizon has changed their FiOS AUP effective yesterday, and added an interesting new clause to their specific examples that we're all familiar with: 'it is a violation of the Agreement and this AUP to ... post off-topic information on message boards, chat rooms or social networking sites.' At this point, every FiOS-based Slashdot user is breaking the new AUP."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Verizon Changes FiOS AUP, -1, Offtopic

Comments Filter:
  • by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:26PM (#30286220) Journal

    I think it was a cool game. Clever plot, movie-like experience that took your breath away and huge explosions. It was sad that there wasn't more of those sneaky sniper missions however.

    Multiplayer is cool with it's leveling and perks, which actually matter quite a lot. Your characters abilities are totally different based on your perks. Co-op play is also great fun.

    What do you think?

    funny picture [wordpress.com]

  • Windows ME (Score:5, Funny)

    by Neil Hodges (960909) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:28PM (#30286264)

    My experience with Windows ME wasn't exactly a good one. As soon as I installed a second hard drive, it would bluescreen at boot. XP was better back then (when it was first released).

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Kjella (173770)

      I'm sorry, but that post is automatically -1, Redundant instead because it's been done to death, resurrected as a horse, flogged to death and beyond then turned into a zombie and still haunts this place.

      • by Again (1351325)
        Well, on my Thinkpad I wasn't even able to install XP. Everytime I tried it would blue screen. And yes, the cd was legitimate.
  • by Average_Joe_Sixpack (534373) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:32PM (#30286326)

    Go Fu*NO CARRIER

    • by autocracy (192714)
      That shows up as the first on-topic post... too bad it was cut short. Is that the "Don't rub our noses in our shit," clause of their new AUP?
  • by MillionthMonkey (240664) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:35PM (#30286388)

    (b) transmit uninvited communications, data or information, or engage in other similar activities, including without limitation, "spamming", "flaming" or denial of service attacks;

    You people at Verizon are a bunch of asswipes.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by cream wobbly (1102689)

      You missed section (b)(ii):

      Trolling, on the other hand, is perfectly fine by us.

      And the footnote:

      1. In fact, this is a troll. Bite me.

    • You're doing it wrong. You were supposed to attack their sexuality.
    • fuck you, you product of a failed abortion! What, were you born with a coathanger sticking out of your head? Did your mom have any kids that lived other than the ones I stuck her with?

      fucking waste of skin asshole. Die in a fire, you douchebag ignoramus right-wing pinko liberal nazi bag of puke-ridden shit.

      Now THAT's a proper flame! COME GET ME, VERIZON!

    • You people at Verizon are a bunch of asswipes.

      But dude, that's on-topic.

      Oh, man. We need to recover this thread, ASAP.

      I just had a cookie. I like cookies. Especially Farmers Market oatmeal raisin cookies, homemade ginger crinkles, and those butter cookies that only Mom makes right.

      Do you like cookies?

      I do.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      (b) transmit uninvited communications, data or information, or engage in other similar activities,

      This reminds me how silly and broad these ToSes are. That appears to even making pinging against the ToS. What is an "uninvited communication" when it comes to the internet?

  • This may be overbroad wording in response to spam comments or the like (remember the Christmas store junk that kept getting posted here over the last few weeks?). The wording is broad, but that may very well be to make sure that they can reasonably catch it all and respond.

    Sorry if that's too ontopic. I guess I could help that out by copy and pasting some hot fanfic but a quick google search doesn't show any Steven Chu/Terry Tao slash.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by conlaw (983784)

      The wording is broad, but that may very well be to make sure that they can reasonably catch it all and respond.

      But if it's too broad, an affected customer can try to get a court to throw it out on grounds of ambiguity! Now do the hokey-pokey and turn yourself around. That's what its all about!

    • by pz (113803)

      This may be overbroad wording in response to spam comments or the like (remember the Christmas store junk that kept getting posted here over the last few weeks?). The wording is broad, but that may very well be to make sure that they can reasonably catch it all and respond.

      Sorry if that's too ontopic. I guess I could help that out by copy and pasting some hot fanfic but a quick google search doesn't show any Steven Chu/Terry Tao slash.

      And it gives them ammunition to terminate essentially anyone's service, at will, since deciding whether a posting is on-topic or off-topic is entirely subjective.

      • by pz (113803)

        It's all spelled out in their AUP, first paragraph:

        General Policy: Verizon reserves the sole discretion to deny or restrict your Service, or immediately to suspend or terminate your Service, if the use of your Service by you or anyone using it, in our sole discretion, violates the Agreement or other Verizon policies, is objectionable or unlawful, interferes with the functioning or use of the Internet or the Verizon network by Verizon or other users, or violates the terms of this Acceptable Use Policy ("AUP").

    • by Chyeld (713439) <chyeld@gmai l . c om> on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @03:25PM (#30287296)

      If you read the whole section, it's a list of examples of what they consider to be violations of Section 1. Someone just got diarrhea of the fingers and started listing all the ways to misbehave online. They even include flaming.

      The takeaway is Verizon is attempting to say that if you act out in any manner whatsoever, do anything they don't like, or just get on the wrong side of one of their IT folk, your service is dead. Overbroad is an understatement. This is them writing a blank check to themselves to allow them to do whatever they want, whenever they want.

      1. General Policy: Verizon reserves the sole discretion to deny or restrict your Service, or immediately to suspend or terminate your Service, if the use of your Service by you or anyone using it, in our sole discretion, violates the Agreement or other Verizon policies, is objectionable or unlawful, interferes with the functioning or use of the Internet or the Verizon network by Verizon or other users, or violates the terms of this Acceptable Use Policy ("AUP").
      2. Specific Examples of AUP Violations. The following are examples of conduct which may lead to termination of your Service. Without limiting the general policy in Section 1, it is a violation of the Agreement and this AUP to: (a) access without permission or right the accounts or computer systems of others, to spoof the URL, DNS or IP addresses of Verizon or any other entity, or to penetrate the security measures of Verizon or any other person's computer system, or to attempt any of the foregoing; (b) transmit uninvited communications, data or information, or engage in other similar activities, including without limitation, "spamming", "flaming" or denial of service attacks; (c) intercept, interfere with or redirect email or other transmissions sent by or to others; (d) introduce viruses, worms, harmful code or Trojan horses on the Internet; (e) post off-topic information on message boards, chat rooms or social networking sites; (f) engage in conduct that is defamatory, fraudulent, obscene or deceptive; (g) violate Verizon's or any third party's copyright, trademark, proprietary or other intellectual property rights; (h) engage in any conduct harmful to the Verizon network, the Internet generally or other Internet users; (i) generate excessive amounts of email or other Internet traffic; (j) use the Service to violate any rule, policy or guideline of Verizon; (k) use the service in any fashion for the transmission or dissemination of images containing child pornography or in a manner that is obscene, sexually explicit, cruel or racist in nature or which espouses, promotes or incites bigotry, hatred or racism; or (l) use the Service in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria or any other E:1 Country as designated by the Department of Commerce.

      To cover the fanfic requirement:

      DOOM: Repercussions of Evil

      John Stalvern waited. The lights above him blinked and sparked out of the air. There were demons in the base. He didn't see them, but had expected them now for years. His warnings to Cernel Joson were not listenend to and now it was too late. Far too late for now, anyway.
      John was a space marine for fourteen years. When he was young he watched the spaceships and he said to dad "I want to be on the ships daddy."
      Dad said "No! You will BE KILL BY DEMONS"
      There was a time when he believed him. Then as he got oldered he stopped. But now in the space station base of the UAC he knew there were demons.
      "This is Joson" the radio crackered. "You must fight the demons!"
      So John gotted his palsma rifle and blew up the wall.
      "HE GOING TO KILL US" said the demons
      "I will shoot at him" said the cyberdemon and he fired the rocket missiles. John plasmaed at him and tried to blew him up. But then the ceiling fell and they were trapped and not able to kill.
      "No! I must kill the demons" he shouted
      The radio said "No, John. You are the demons"
      And then John was a zombie.

  • by ClayJar (126217) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:41PM (#30286506) Homepage

    "[I]t is a violation of the Agreement and this AUP to[...] (b) transmit uninvited communications, data or information"

    They don't even say "unwanted" or some such term. According to the letter of their AUP, discovering an old friend's email address (or Facebook page... whatever people use these days) and sending the friend a message "may lead to termination of your Service". They could replace their entire AUP with an at-will statement and it would be no less unconscionable.

    Of course, cutting off anyone who sends yet another "e-card" might actually be justified, and according to AUP 2.b, they could do it. :)

    Obviously, it's not likely they will enforce the AUP in an egregiously Draconian manner, but I for one would prefer having the outlandish bits *implied* rather than expressly stated. It just looks cleaner. On the other hand, they didn't quite go completely Pythonesque on us:

    Prohibited:
    1. Users named other than "Thomas".
    2. Users named "Thomas".

    • by dcollins (135727)

      "[I]t is a violation of the Agreement and this AUP to[...] (b) transmit uninvited communications, data or information"

      I'd say this is pretty Pythonesque. I can't send you data until you invite me. Of course, you sending me an invitation is prohibited unless I invited you to do that. But I can't do that unless you invited me first. Etc.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Thinboy00 (1190815)

        "[I]t is a violation of the Agreement and this AUP to[...] (b) transmit uninvited communications, data or information"

        I'd say this is pretty Pythonesque. I can't send you data until you invite me. Of course, you sending me an invitation is prohibited unless I invited you to do that. But I can't do that unless you invited me first. Etc.

        That just means in theory that VZ customers can't contact each other.

        Of course, in theoretical practice VZ customers can't contact anyone by any reasonable and modern protocol.

        Of course, in practical practice it means VZ can terminate its customers whenever it wants.

  • Because being a Linux fanboy was too mainstream.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Jazz-Masta (240659)

      Because being a Linux fanboy was too mainstream.

      Wow, it takes talent to be modded offtopic on an offtopic conversation.

  • Because now Veri$on will be able to disconnect anybody for any reason under the pretext of breaking a rule. Quite convenient. Same with government and the thousands of laws.

    Not every law is applied to everybody, but when anybody becomes inconvenient, there are enough laws to take them out of the picture.

    The more numerous the laws, the more corrupted the state.

  • Watch out, the Verizon Internet Police will put a stop to your trolling efforts!

  • by Jazz-Masta (240659) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:58PM (#30286816)

    How DARE you break the terms of your agreement! Have we stooped so low? What next? Downloading of Movies, Music, etc?

  • Hopefully the most of the normal troll [slashdot.org] spam [slashdot.org] by bots on Slashdot are on FiOS.

    Say, why aren't the posting here?

    I couldn't find any more examples, but would like more here.

  • Cormorants are often disturbed by instantiated flailing humbled. Flail, flail, with the dying of the crepuscule. "Undoubtedly," Miriale remarked, "for if it were not so, how would anyone surrender their sllllllll?"
  • In my experience online, particularly with internet forums featuring heavy political debate (or more accurately put, "argumentation"), rules like "no off-topic posting" can easily be twisted or broadened to accompany the biases of the moderators or the majority opinion to stifle dissent.

    How? For example, someone who has a completely opposite opinion of the majority may often have a completely opposing ideology and thus their opposition may be seen as "trolling." I'll use examples from the supposed "both s

    • If you need a tl;dr example, just big a view that is so abhorrent to you that it you consider it offensive by default. I'll pick on neo-nazis bigots here. Almost no forum seriously allows neo-nazi punks to spread their bullshit because it's racially offensive. But they do so at the expense of "free" discussion (again, not saying all discussion must be "free"), and when you start taking any side based on how offensive the view is, you slant the discourse by default.

      Of course, most ISP ToSes do not allow y

  • Oopsie (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rindeee (530084) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @03:19PM (#30287198)
    What Verizon (Comcast, and others) are going to learn the hard way is the liability that comes along with this. IANAL, but, from experience I understand that if you specifically say something is prohibited, but then do not enforce prohibition of it and someone causes harm to another where it would have been precluded had you enforced the prohibition of said activity, guess who's liable. :)
  • Two old Greek guys and three Romans are sitting at a bakery drinking coffee and eating kabobs when Socrates and Plato walk by discussing the nature of "The State".

    The first old Greek guys comments to Socrates "You know I once read a book that said a soverign rules by divine mandate."

    Socrates smacks him across the face and pisses in his coffee. "YOu have been modded -1 Offtopic.

    His second friend gets up intent on beating the remaining piss out of Socrates but Plato does a "Solar Flare Tsunami" blast to his f

  • -- for me to bitch and moan about how Verizon FiOS lines cover all the streets around my apartment complex, but, due to a Verizon f*ck up on the property years ago (which caused a couple thousand in damage to a drain and structures around it) that my apartment complex *will not* allow Verizon on the property to bring the FiOS lines to the various apartment buildings.

    I say, screw them!

  • How many memories does it take to install Windows 95 to my motherboard?

This place just isn't big enough for all of us. We've got to find a way off this planet.

Working...