On Mon, 19 May 2003 17:01:32 -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
From: "Bob Wyman" <bob(_at_)wyman(_dot_)us>
Given the tremendous backlash against spam that we've seen lately, I
wouldn't be surprised if we began to see proposals requiring that
specific mechanisms be used to combat it. Just as new laws restricting
civil liberties have been "collateral damage" of the anti-terrorism
effort, new laws reducing the voluntary nature of Internet standards may
be "collateral damage" of the anti-spam effort.
Another possibility would be that as the spam problem matures (and,
assuming no silver bullet) what we're likely to see are lawsuits based
on what the courts will accept as unreasonable negligence causing
damage to another party.
I think a climate with that as a factor would motivate changes in
minimal standards pretty quickly.
In adjudicating the equities involved where no law dictates, the courts
pay close attention to the practices and standards governing the
activities involved. For this reason it is essential that the Internet
community establish clear expectations regarding the acts to be performed
by, and against, spam enablers. I have attempted to draft some ideas
at
<http://www.camblab.com/misc/univ_std.txt>
and the thinking which led to the above
<http://www.camblab.com/nugget/spam_03.pdf>
Comments welcome.
Jeffrey Race
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg