Re: Ruling in _Intel v. Hamidi_ -Reply


To CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
From "Andrew C. Greenberg" <werdna@GATE.NET>
Date Thu, 6 May 1999 20:56:46 -0400
In-Reply-To <s7314d8b.077@shu.edu >
References <s7314d8b.077@shu.edu >
Reply-To Law & Policy of Computer Communications <CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
Sender Law & Policy of Computer Communications <CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>

>Or, stated differently, there seems to be something dishonest about
>claiming that 10,000 "I love Intel!" messages are not a "use," but
>10,000 "Intel sucks!" messages are.

Granted, either both or neither should be "use."  However, there is
nothing about finding both a use that requires the same result in
both cases, or precludes the same result in both cases.  (A denial of
service result can derive from too many messages, regardless of their
content, but the number of messages (qualitatively speaking) might
distinguish between de minimus or if not de minimus, perhaps
consented, uses and those that are not.)


Partial thread listing:
Re: Ruling in _Intel v. Hamidi_ -Reply, (continued)