Re: AT&T bans anonymous messages

[Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>]

On Mon, 24 Jun 1996, WorldNet User wrote:

> AT&T WorldNet service has banned the sending of anonymous email or
> posting anonymously.
> 
> >From the "AT&T WorldNet Service Operating Policies":
> 
> 		(i) Members may not post or transmit any message
> 		anonymously or under a false name. Members may
> 		not permit any other person (other than an agent
> 		acting on Member's behalf and subject to Member's
> 		supervision) to access the Service Member's
> 		account for any purpose.

I don't have a problem with this, actually, and a brief visit to
news.admin.net-abuse.misc would show why. AT&T is selling you access under a
given username. If you send a message traceable to AT&T, they are held
accountable. I think it's reasonable for them to demand that you make
messages traceable to yourself so that you are held accountable. 

If AT&T bans or monitors access to anonymous remailers, then that's a
different kettle of fish entirely, but they're not doing that. The policy
above allows you to send a message to an anonymous remailer under your own
name.

> The no anon rule even beat the no indecency rule, which is second:

I disagree. The below is outrageous.

> 		(ii) Members may not post or transmit any message
>                 which is libelous, defamatory or which discloses
>                 private or personal matters concerning any person.
>                 Members may not post or transmit any message,
>                 data, image or program which is indecent, obscene
>                 or pornographic. 
> 
> http://www.worldnet.att.net/care/terms/#oppol

"Discloses private or personal matters concerning any person"? I guess any
discussion of political figures is out.

-rich
 http://www.c2.org/~rich/