[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re[2]: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes blacklisting spammers


On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, carey wrote:
> Thursday, October 18, 2001, 7:05:14 PM, you wrote:
> 
> > Imagine that someone made a list of suspected child molesters.  Also
> > imagine that your name was put on it by mistake.  Would it really 
> > matter that the only people who use the list are the ones who
> > voluntarily chose to use it?
> 
> Your analogy fails for a key reason:
> The RBL list does allow you to have the address removed once you've
> proven  you're no longer an open - mail relay.

Um, so modify his analogy so that you can have your name removed from the
"child molestors" list if you can prove you're not a child molestor.

Yay.  It's still "guilty until proven innocent".

> I've had my local ISP have this problem a few times.  Also, unlike
> what theEFF article says, at least in my case, there was
> identification that the message was blocked by the recipient ISP,
> notably that the recipient blocked my mail due to the fact that my ISP
> was an open-relay.
> 
> The molestor case exists (thank you meghan's law) and unlike RBL
> doesn't allow for an individual to be removed.

No, but it requries CONVICTION, doesn't it?  Whereas the RBL just requires
REPORTS of spam.

Believe me, I'm no friend of the spammer.  And I worked for YEARS at a
major telecommunicatios carrier where we were constantly battling with our
own customers to prevent spam and keep our network clean.

But a prescriptive solution does not exist that does not cause the undue
restriction of legally protected speech.

And, unfortunately, due to the easily forged nature of SMTP, no system of
punishment after the fact can be enforced, either.

Spam is a painful reality... like bad manners or crude language.

We can teach against it, but some people are just going to do whatever
they please and we must respect their right to do so.

J.
--
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme@brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org