based on USA Today facts X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.750) Reply-To: dave@farber.net Begin forwarded message: From: "Synthesis: Law and Technology" <synthesis.law.and.technology@gmail.com> Date: May 12, 2006 12:09:54 PM EDT To: dave@farber.net Cc: peter@peterswire.net Subject: Re: [IP] COMMENTS REQUESTED -- Apparent large telco liability based on USA Today facts Dave, I doubt Peter expected us to find a flaw in his actual analysis since all the loop holes have already been covered and under the most extreme interpretations one would find it difficult to argue directly against his reasoning. If there is a defence possible for the telcos it might be under yet-another discussion of the presidential authority (or the limits thereof). The difference I see in this one (and I am most definitely not an expert on this) is the monetary one. The direct civil cause of action in the statute would seem to incentive for this one to perhaps be taken further? It will be interesting to observe, especially given Qwest's refusal to comply (apparently without sanction?). If Qwest had concerns and voiced them and was not forced to comply it would appear this could be a difficult one, and not just for the telcos. Dan Steinberg SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology 35, du Ravin phone: (613) 794-5356 Chelsea, Quebec J9B 1N1 On 5/12/06, David Farber <dave@farber.net> wrote: Begin forwarded message: