[anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Abuse

There was this little kerfuffle some years back 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/174651/article.html

--srs

> On 17-Aug-2016, at 2:00 PM, Sergey <gforgx at fotontel.ru> wrote:
> 
> That's easy. The analogy is weak. Don't mess the Internet with real world things. The Internet has been self-regulated since its birth. Otherwise we'd have govts and not RIRs controlling the number resources.
> 
> And I hear it all the time that it's specifically RIPE's problem of dealing with rogue sign-ups.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 17 августа 2016 г. 11:24:44 GMT+03:00, ox <andre at ox.co.za> пишет:
>> 
>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 01:11:44 -0700
>> "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
>>>  ox <andre at ox.co.za> you wrote:
>>>> Are fake whois records abuse? I think this is an excellent question
>>>> and requires discussion.
>>>> Personally I think filing fake information to a resource is actually
>>>> a crime called fraud. I am sure that this is also a crime under
>>>> Dutch law and that the Dutch Law enforcement should investigate this?
>>>  
>>>  Why yes!  (Now why didn't *I* think of that?)
>>>  Yes, by all means, let's take a violation of contractual terms between
>>>  two private parties and turn it into a law enforcement matter.  And
>> 
>> I am not sure what you mean,
>> maybe you can explain it to me better?
>> 
>> When one private person/organization steals another private
>> person/organization's car, it is not theft?
>> 
>> When one private party lies, cheats and fraudulently obtains something
>> from another party, it is not fraud?
>> 
>> Because why?
>> 
>> Because they are "private parties" ?
>> 
>> I am so sorry that I am slow in understanding this and than you so much
>> for taking the time to explain this to me
>> 
>> Andre
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Простите за краткость, создано в K-9 Mail.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20160817/526bde9e/attachment.html>