RE: [Asrg] 0. General - News Article - Anti-spam laws

["Peter Kay" <peter@titankey.com>]

I still strongly believe that a consent-based architecture that lets the owner of an email address decide the policies surrounding that email address is the only realistic solution.  All this other stuff to me is band-aids on a structurally flawed infrastructure.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yakov Shafranovich [mailto:research@solidmatrix.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 8:28 AM
> To: asrg@ietf.org
> Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - News Article - Anti-spam laws
> 
> 
> The following CNET News.com article discusses various pros 
> and cons of 
> anti-spam laws:
> 
> http://news.com.com/2010-1071_3-5059822.html
> 
> Some quotes:
> 
> -------snip-----
> The folly of antispam legislation
> By William Blundon
> August 5, 2003, 4:00 AM PT
> 
> "Many of these legislative goals are laudable. However, they 
> fail to make 
> several key distinctions. Most people have an implicit 
> hierarchy of what 
> they consider spam. Illegal, fraudulent and misleading e-mail 
> is spam. 
> E-mail from an unknown source is "spam lite." Unsolicited 
> commercial e-mail 
> from a respected company may be spam, junk mail or simply 
> unwanted but 
> acceptable free speech. E-mail from a company with whom the 
> consumer has an 
> existing commercial relationship can also be considered spam if it is 
> simply unwanted or repetitive. These distinctions are highly 
> idiosyncratic 
> and are not amenable to broad legislation. "
> 
> "The economics of the Internet are different from those of telephone 
> networks or the postal system and do not bode well for any 
> legislative 
> campaign. Moving a telemarketing operation offshore is an expensive 
> proposition, while direct mail costs increase dramatically when mail 
> crosses geographic borders. But it usually costs less to operate a 
> sophisticated e-mail marketing program from New Delhi than it 
> does from New 
> York."
> 
> "Some spammers now send more than 100 million e-mails per day 
> using servers 
> known as "spam cannons." Does it really matter where their 
> servers are 
> located? Most pending spam legislation is designed for consumer, not 
> employee, e-mail. Does it matter to a spammer if he sends 
> e-mail to my home 
> or office? Will companies force their employees to register 
> their corporate 
> e-mail addresses on a do-not-spam list? Will the company do 
> it for them? 
> What if hackers crack the security on a national database of those 
> spam-blocked addresses?  Ethical companies will comply with 
> any new spam 
> legislation. Black or gray spam operations will invest 
> whatever it takes to 
> stay ahead of the technology curve and beyond the arm of the 
> law. As a 
> result, the percentage of dishonest e-mail will only increase.
> 
> Copyright ¬1995-2003 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.
> -------snip----- 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Asrg mailing list
> Asrg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
> 
> 
> 



_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg