Re: [Asrg] Giving Public Notice ....
2003-03-18 12:37:47
Hadmut Danisch wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 01:06:33PM -0500, Chris Lewis wrote:
That's Germany. The law in the US and Canada is different.
I know. Are we searching for solutions that work in USA and
Canada, or for solutions that work anywhere?
Legislative solutions, as are contracts, are of necessity national
rather than international in scope. However, that doesn't mean that
legislative solutions are useless or impossible. Indeed, a US-centric
law enacted in the US would be of considerable use because the vast
majority of spam is US-originated. They can also form a model for other
countries to adapt or adopt.
Ie: what if a child of 8 years old was "caught" spamming pornography
ads? Don't suggest that the law has no recourse - the child may well be
taken into custody by "Children's Aid"/"Foster care" (or local
equivalent), or the courts may refuse to accept the child is doing it on
their own, and promptly charge the person who talked the child into
doing it.
The porn example is a little bit harsh. Let's take an example a
little bit closer to reality. Have a 13 year old boy sending tons
of spam complaining about his teachers, ads for some shop or whatever.
That child would definitely not taken into any custody, since the
german constitution protects the family. This would be a severe
violation of the child's constitutional rights. And it would be
disproportional, which also violates german constitution.
I don't think you understand your own laws that well. German law
wouldn't just pat the child on the head, and leave them free to repeat
committing an offense. The german laws simply make it clear that young
offenders aren't treated the same way as adults. Ditto our Young
Offenders Act.
A child that say, breaks a neighbor's windows may get off the first time
with a warning and confiscation of "proceeds" instead of being fined or
incarcerated. But repeats _will_ result in different reactions, such as
holding the parents liable for restitution, mandatory counselling, and
up to taking custody of the child and putting them under foster care.
[At this level, perhaps the primary difference between US law and many
others is simply that the child will often not get away with the "first
time", and the age thresholds are lower.]
The German constitution, as does ours, "protects the child".
"Protecting the child" doesn't mean that the child gets to do anything
they want to as often as they want. It just means that the state uses
gentler persuasion than immediate punitive measures. Repeated
violations of the law, or fraud, or harrassment or whatever _do_ get
handled - through forcing parental responsibility or other things, as it
becomes necessary. _That_ is protecting the child - trying to guide
them away from the bad, and towards the good. But if that doesn't work,
the state still has other remedies.
I am aware that such things are handled differently in the US.
In european eyes it is absolutely ridiculous how US laws/courts
treat children and youngsters. But that's far off-topic.
Yes it is. But you're making a big mistake...
We should be aware that we cannot use anti-spam methods that
depend on the US law or the US way of interpreting human rights.
Anti-Spam methods must work everywhere on the world. So try
to not limit your view on the USA.
What makes you think my view is US-oriented? Hint: I'm not American and
I'm not in the USA. The YOA is not a US law. The YOA is considered one
of the most progressive laws on this subject in the world.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
|
|