In <20030428233931(_dot_)T94733(_at_)Space(_dot_)Net> Markus Stumpf
<maex-lists-spam-ietf-asrg(_at_)Space(_dot_)Net> writes:
Some more info can be found at
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2003/apr03/04-28antispam.asp
Thanks for the link. It does have a few more details, but no where
near enough to make me feel all warm and fuzzy.
Actually, this answer kind of gives me the willies:
: PressPass: Do you see a need for more legislation in this space?
:
: Arbogast: We view legislation as a key part of combating spam, and
: are actively encouraging stronger laws. For example, we've been
: suggesting stronger anti-fraud and "anti-harvesting" measures to
: make it easier to go after the worst spammers. A number of bills
: have also been proposed that would require unsolicited commercial
: e-mail to be labeled with tags such as "ADV" in the subject line, to
: signify that the e-mail is advertising. While this won't solve any
: problems all by itself, if this idea were to be combined with
: innovative e-mail filtering capabilities and a "safe harbor"
: approach - which would allow commercial e-mail senders to avoid this
: labeling if they were to reliably commit to a set of
: industry-accepted e-mail guidelines - we would then have a framework
: that could give people control over what categories of e-mail reach
: their Inboxes.
By "industry-accepted e-mail guidelines", I hope they don't mean
the "bulk email senders" industry. Details are critical here.
Wasn't MicroSoft just trying to get Washington State's anti-spam law
weakened?
-wayne
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg