Re: Commecial vs fairness (was: spam support)

[leo vegoda <]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2002, paul@localhost wrote: Re: RE: Commecial vs fairness (was: spam support)

[...]

>                                                            The problem is
> lesser issues like spam and credit card fraud. How many networks and even
> law enforcement agencies deal with credit card fraud unless very large
> amounts of money are involved? If you've ever had a fraudulent card order on
> the net (and we've had a few, although careful vetting has kept it low), try
> getting the police anywhere to deal with it. I think there is a case for
> networks to act responsibly here and not just act when the cops start
> knocking at the door.

While this thread was previously about RIPE NCC being asked to enforce
an AUP of some kind WRT spam and network abuse it seems like you're now
morphing the request to include a further enlargement of the NCC's
remit.

I'm not sure what you would want RIPE NCC to do about "Credit Card Fraud
Over IP" but I suspect that governments will want to retain their
monopoly on law enforcement. If your local constabulary is not
interested in investigating CCF crimes committed against you then you
could:

 - investigate things yourself and initiate a private prosecution
 - join with credit card issuers and develop ways to prevent this crime,
   or
 - lobby the relevant government department to direct the efforts of the
   police at this particular crime

It seems odd to request a Registry to become a police force, a court
and to then enforce its own judgements. Or perhaps I misunderstood you.

Regards,

-- 
leo vegoda (speaking for himself)
"One size never fits all"
RFC1925 - The Twelve Networking Truths