Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - Legal - Subject labeling - FTC response

["Mark E. Mallett" <mem@mv.mv.com>]

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 08:22:00AM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >A somewhat related document is draft-malamud-no-soliciting-02, found at:
> >
> >	http://trusted.resource.org/no-solicit/
> >
> 
> The problem I have with the various NO-SOLICIT / NO-UCE proposals that have
> been made over the years is that they seem to imply that a system /
> recipient accepts UCE / solicitations *by* *default* unless it gives the
> sender notice. And that a sender will assume it's doing nothing "wrong" if
> it isn't given any such notice. It strikes me that this is completely
> contrary to the direction of this group (and the law in many
> jurisdictions). A recipient does not give implicit consent to any
> communication by not expressly denying it, any more that I accept that you
> can shoot me because I don't wear a T-shirt saying "No-Shooting".

Hmm, that's exactly the point I made when Eric first submitted his
draft back on November 14.  Thus I agree :-)

-mm-

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