On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 05:08:14PM -0600, Art Pollard wrote
One thing that we might be able to do while we are trying to figure out
what technical solutions are feasible is to come out with an interrum
"Guide For Anti-Spam Legislation" which we can provide for legislators who
are working on passing or updating anti-spam legislation.
I live in Canada, and made a submission as a private citizen when the
government called for coments on emarketing. Here is a verbatim extract
from that submission. I believe it is just as valid in the USA...
- "A role for government"
I don't ask governments for extra assistance, I ask instead that they
not stab the internet community in the back as we battle against UBE
(aka spam). In the USA, corporate spammers with deep pockets have taken
to suing any group that recommends blocking them. MAPS, which was the
original hero in the war against spam has been SLAPPed into
ineffectiveness. The current popular hero is SPEWS, a group which has
to remain anonymous and shadowy to hide from corporate spam barons who
engage in legal thuggery and threaten to sue blocklist maintainers into
bankruptcy. All I ask for is...
a) the government recognize that "the internet" is a network of private
networks that are the private property of their respective owners,
who excercise full control over them. I.e. they are *NOT* "common
carriers". They have no obligation to accept any data packets,
other than those obligations spelled out in contracts, i.e. peering
agreements or contracts with customers or other signed contracts.
Therefore no legislation or regulations be enacted which would force
any data packets, including email, to be accepted against the wishes
of ISPs and their paying customers.
b) that ISP's and blocklist maintainers be held harmless for
good-faith efforts to block/reduce unwanted email. This includes
deliberate boycotts of non-spamming address space of bandwidth
providers who host spammers in other parts of their address space.
And *YES*, this does include the old customer-of-a-customer-of-a
customer finger-pointing scenario.
c) the fact that refusal of data traffic, other than that required by
contract, deprives someone of revenue shall *NOT* constitute cause
for civil or criminal court actions or other government sanctions
against any person (corporate or human being) that...
1) maintains and/or publishes a blocking list (DNSbl)
2) operates a mailserver that receives email from the internet, and
chooses to reject email traffic that they are not obligated by
contract to accept.
--
Walter Dnes <waltdnes(_at_)waltdnes(_dot_)org>
An infinite number of monkeys pounding away on keyboards will
eventually produce a report showing that Windows is more secure,
and has a lower TCO, than linux.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg