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

[Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org]

Not necessarily. Lots of adult websites send out spam with their URLs. 
Contacting them via the URL doesn't help you determine who actually 
spammed you. It's another layer of obfuscation and deniability.




Noah silva <nsilva@atari-source.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
10/19/01 11:22 AM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        RE: Re[2]: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes blacklisting spammers


yes, but the amusing thing is that they always have to include some form
of contact if they expect you to actually purchase anything from them.

 -- noah silva 

On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Bryan Taylor wrote:

> 
> --- Richard Hartman <hartman@onetouch.com> wrote:
> 
> > Moreover, spamming is not an excercise of free-speech.  It is an
> > attempt at free advertising.  Basically, they are getting something
> > for nothing.  They are (generally) trying to sell something, and
> > not have to pay to advertise it.
> 
> Well, advertising IS a form of speech. The real problem is when they 
forge
> headers or any of the other dirty tricks spammers use. I call this false
> advertising or even fraud. This is a categrory of speech that isn't 
protected
> and can be regulated. Ultimately deceptive trade practices are an 
attempt to
> steal.
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com
>