Re: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone from attbi please contact me ...)
It reminds me of the Netgear and U of Wisconsin time server SNAFU. http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~plonka/netgear-sntp/
The difference is that Netgear admitted responsibility and worked with UW to cope with the issue. Further, Netgear has funded UW in it's cleanup efforts and generally stepped up to the plate. As much as I don't care for Netgear's products, they did show decent corporate responsibility when UW was able to escalate to the appropriate management at Netgear.
Sounds like a great example to put before the judge when you sue Microsoft. Can anyone say "class action"? --Michael Dillon
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:48:51 BST, Michael.Dillon@radianz.com said:
Sounds like a great example to put before the judge when you sue Microsoft. Can anyone say "class action"?
Microsoft can fight one class action suit a lot more easily than they can send lawyers to Christiansburg, Virginia on 8 separate occasions (yes, there's at least that many ISPs and providers in Montgomery County) to settle 8 different $400 lawsuits.
Micahel, I think class action is a less effective approach here. Micr0$0ft has vast resources ready to take on any large single lawsuit and make it a very expensive and resource intensive process for their opposition. On the other hand, with a low (around $25 last I looked) filing fee and virtually no other real costs involved, and, and expidited calendar (usually around 2-6 months from filing to hearing), the small claims process looks much more attractive as a method for dealing with this. Think about Micr0$0ft trying to fight off thousands or better millions of small claims cases all over the country. Even if Micr0$0ft wins every one, they lose. Owen --On Monday, September 29, 2003 5:48 PM +0100 Michael.Dillon@radianz.com wrote:
It reminds me of the Netgear and U of Wisconsin time server SNAFU. http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~plonka/netgear-sntp/
The difference is that Netgear admitted responsibility and worked with UW to cope with the issue. Further, Netgear has funded UW in it's cleanup efforts and generally stepped up to the plate. As much as I don't care for Netgear's products, they did show decent corporate responsibility when UW was able to escalate to the appropriate management at Netgear.
Sounds like a great example to put before the judge when you sue Microsoft. Can anyone say "class action"?
--Michael Dillon
---- Original Message ----- From: "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com> To: <Michael.Dillon@radianz.com>; <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 1:07 PM Subject: Re: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone from attbi please contact me ...)
Think about Micr0$0ft trying to fight off thousands or better millions of small claims cases all over the country. Even if Micr0$0ft wins every one, they lose.
Owen
FWIW (and IANAL) in Ohio a corporation filing in small claims court requires a lawyer to represent the company. This increases the cost to at least $250 just to get in the door. I would be suprised to get out with under a $1000 in legal fees. Even though we have a Ohio spam law (yeah - I know we are talking about DNS here..) AFAIK no ISP has bothered trying to use it since the cost relative to the potential recovery is out of line. Makes it pretty impractical to use this method for dealing with annoying but economically minor issues. Mark
participants (4)
-
Mark Radabaugh -
Michael.Dillon＠radianz.com -
Owen DeLong -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu