Stupid server semantic argument

[Ric Werme]

I haven't been following this thread very closely, so slight apologies for
the lack or research on my part and the risk I'm repeating what someone
else said.  I won't be the first....

> On 6/20/07, Paul Lussier <p.lussier at comcast.net> wrote:
> VirginSnow at vfemail.net writes:

>> How many different ways can Ben explain this before it sinks in?
>> Go read the ToS.  It's very clearly written.


> Back when I had Comcast, the TOS said you needed to pay extra to connect a 2nd computer.  I can't imagine they've ever enforced it.  Now that the wireless firewall routers are out, I imagine that is no longer in the TOS. 

Yes, but IIRC, the second computer would come with its own IP address (still
DHCP, but no NAT in the way (or read that as no firewall in the way).

> I remember some information from them that would sell you a 4 port firewall/router that let you connect up to 4 systems for $/month.  And you paid for the equipment up front.  Gee, this sounds like the TOS for TVs in the house as well. 

> Now, everyone gets a linksys and does it themselves.  

And I believe Comcast has change the ToS to permit that, for both TVs and
computers.

	-Ric Werme