[anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Abuse

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 03:31:49 -0700
"Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
> ox <andre at ox.co.za> wrote:
> >> 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?
> I'm not sure what it is that you're not sure about.
> 
> I've made three simple points, none of which should really be all that
> difficult to understand.  These three points are as follows:
> 
>      1)  In practice, law enforcement *can't* deal with these things.
>          They don't have the resources or, in general, the technical
>          competence to even understand them.  (See link below.)
> 

They can, and they do.

an example from two emails ago:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/174651/article.html  

Where you also said: 
> Thanks LOTS Suresh!  I didn't know anthing about this till now, but

> this 2)  In practice, in those rare instances when law enforcement
> stupidly injects itself into civil contractual disputes, claiming that

Okay, I think you said it best yourself, no need for me to say anything
anyone can simply read what you have said.

>          they have criminal jurisdiction, they usually do so in a
> ham-fisted way that does more harm than good.  (See link below.)
> 
>      3)  Even RIPE NCC legal staff recognize that it would be the
> height of silly absurdity for them to call in the Dutch police, or

Thank you, but you have managed to type a lot but clear up and/or add
and/or answer nothing.

You have also chosen, conveniently, for an unknown reason, to ignore
the previous posts which deal with exactly the same issue.

Andre