Re: [Asrg] Anti-spam laws do work, FYI. There's proof.

["David Wall" <d.wall at computer.org>]

> > Quoting Seth Breidbart <sethb at panix.com>:
> >> The tradeoff between spam accepted and non-spam lost is up to the
> >> user.
> >
> > And not the ISP.
>
> Feel free to run your own ISP on those terms.  If you're right, you'll
> get rich.  If customers stay away in droves, you might learn
> something.

Or you may discover that after all is said and done, users sue those ISPs
that don't.  Most telecom laws do not allow the carrier to decide what's
allowed to happen to a message that has been sent to a person.  If you send
me a message and all is okay, there is no legal basis for the receiving
entity to decide whether I get to receive it or not.  If the user sets up
the filters, then fine, but when the carriers are setting up the filters,
we're in big trouble.

Imagine if the post office decided which letters it would deliver.  Imagine
phone companies deciding which calls get through, or which faxes get
delivered?

The law also is against the ISPs in that their attempts to filter put them
into the business of publisher rather than common carrier.  This means that
if things that SHOULD have been blocked get through, the recipient could
claim that the ISP "approved" it or was negligent, etc.  It's a dangerous
world when an ISP does that filtering.

However, SPF doesn't seem to suffer from that, per se, in that the owner of
domains who give out email addresses control things, so the receiving ISP
doesn't have to make a judgement call, just follow the instructions.  Spam
filtering at the ISP level is another thing entirely.

David


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