So they can violate the rights of US citizens

Post #25,411 by nking 1/24/02 12:01:06 AM Reply	So they can violate the rights of US citizens and get away with it? I suppose that next they will block access to MSN and Hotmail? Or how about they block access to Opera and iCab? How about blocking access to Yahoo and Google? Let's get rid of any web site that might compete with AOL, shall we? The Fox Network, UPN, and PBS, also blocked. Next thing you know, they will be burning any books that are not made by their parent company? This is why I advocate people to leave AOL, and it has been proven that AOL does these things. "Will code Visual BASIC for cash."
Post #25,419 by pwhysall 1/24/02 2:18:56 AM Reply	They're not, though. It's only a violation of your rights if you have no choice. You don't like it, you choose another provider. Hardly a violation of anything. (Although one might say that the sodding annoying adverts with that daffy woman are a violation of good taste) Peter Shill For Hire [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal]
Post #25,440 by nking 1/24/02 9:07:55 AM Reply	That is like saying to a woman that her rights are not being violated because she was sexually harassed at work, because she has a choice to quit that job and work someplace else. D'oh! "Will code Visual BASIC for cash."
Post #25,444 by Silverlock 1/24/02 9:25:18 AM Reply	Doh! back atcha Norm. Try to understand. AOL provides a paid for service. You don't like the way they do that. You are free to not pay for it. Nuff said. When I visit the aquarium, the same thought keeps running through my mind; Leemmmooonnn, Buuttteerrr, MMMmmmmmm good!
Post #25,611 by nking 1/24/02 6:03:42 PM Reply	Customers and users still have rights that is why there are people suing AOL. It is not just people getting ticked off because they got a busy signal for five hours to try and connect to the AOL service, so they put up an Anti-AOL web site. Freedom of speech is more than just protection from the government. [link\|http://www.law.ucla.edu/faculty/volokh/harass/\|Freedom of Speech Vs. Workplace harassment] But anyway about people suing AOL: [link\|http://www.cnn.com/2000/LAW/06/25/aol.lawsuit/\|Lawsuit against AOL for pop-up ads] [link\|http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/02/02/aol.lawsuit.02/\|Disgruntled AOL 5.0 users seek $8B in damages] [link\|http://www.a-g-s.com/netaolp.htm\|Join the class action lawsuit against AOL for violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act] [link\|http://seattle.bcentral.com/seattle/stories/1997/01/13/daily15.html\|Attorneys file lawsuit against AOL for not proving the access it promised] [link\|http://personal.riverusers.com/~s/aolsuit2.htm\|AOL execs accused or wire fraud and racketering] Also: [link\|http://www.zdnet.com/products/stories/reviews/0,4161,2435999,00.html\|AOL's conflict with other ISPs] Don't use it? Exactly my point, AOL should not be used. I won't use it, don't make me. "Will code Visual BASIC for cash."
Post #25,623 by bepatient 1/24/02 7:21:14 PM Reply	Wow...there are some good ones there... ...like the lawsuit that says pop-up adds should be free time! Lets take that to Comcast next...tell them they have to rebate me for 12 minutes of every cable hour for the last 25 years... I'm about to retire now. Your only right is your right to not use it. You are well within your rights at this time. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #25,632 by nking 1/24/02 7:45:16 PM Reply	You may have a point if the cable company charges you per hour instead of per month. AOL, last I checked, had a rate that was per hour, and another that was per month. If you are paying $3/hr and it takes 15 minutes of your hour to look at pop-up ads, you might want a refund as well. "Will code Visual BASIC for cash."
Post #25,639 by bepatient 1/24/02 8:26:07 PM Reply	Think. ...20% of television is ad time. That would mean that the cable company is making double income for that time. The lawyer in the AOL suit thinks thats illegal. (hint...its not) Point...you linked to alot of spurious lawsuits and one good one. The one from 1997 when AOL subscriber growth outpaced the infrastructure. I never had a problem connecting...but I did get something as part of the class action...I forget what the actual settlement was. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #25,719 by nking 1/25/02 1:06:57 PM Reply	Think again With the exception of PBS, local TV stations are free to the consumer and paid for by the advertising. The consumer is not paying an hourly fee to watch the local news, or other programming. If they are, then you might have a point. All the cable company does is rebroadcast the signal over their cable lines. They do not charge extra for this, it is part of their basic package. Or at least most cable companies are like that. Sometimes they replace the commercials from the local station with their own commercials. Like that Dog Food commercial gets replaced with the cable comapny's "Pay per view" movie ad. I am glad that you got something for your troubles. Someone sending you email could have had it bounce, maybe at 2am in the morning, and maybe that person sending it was SPAMMING you, but still even if you didn't know about it, you could have had a loss in service. It was proven in court that a loss of service did happen, somehow your name got on their list as someone effected by it. Even if you got 35 cents, that is something for your time. "Will code Visual BASIC for cash."
Post #25,448 by Andrew Grygus 1/24/02 9:44:00 AM Reply	Getting a little off base, aren't we? I seriously doubt many AOL users have such a dependence on AOL access it would threaten their livlihood and survival to leave. Nor do I think there would be a long period of searching and rejection trying to get accepted by another ISP. The ugly truth is, most AOL users became AOL users because AOL made it easier than anyone else. The vast majority of AOL users stay with AOL voluntarily, because the service suits their needs well enough. Some like the proprietary content, too. Some with other ISPs desire that proprietary content enough to pay $14 / month (recently raised) to access it without an AOL account. A few, however, get in tiffs and show their psychological dependency on mother AOL by putting up bitter anti-AOL Web sites, just like an overly dependent spouse or lover when their partner gets tired of it and moves on. If AOL doesn't suit you, don't use it. I don't. Many I know do. And, incidentally, free speach is not an issue. The Constitution applies to government repression of free speach. "Censorship" is a "service" of AOL many appreciate. If you don't, they have no obligation to you. Use a different ISP. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #25,521 by bepatient 1/24/02 2:11:01 PM Reply	Thanks AG...saved me some typing. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]

Welcome to IWETHEY!