I'd like to focus for a moment on the substance of Gates'
editorial and avoid the Microsoft bashing going on in other threads...
Gates says:
"Our proposal is to create a regulatory "safe harbor"
status for senders who comply with e-mail guidelines
confirmed by an FTC-approved self-regulatory body."
Personally, I think this sounds like a terrible idea. While it
may be well-intentioned, the reality is that any "safe-harbor" will
probably simply establish a privileged class of spammers. Given the
tremendous lobbying pressure that will undoubtedly be applied by direct
marketers, companies, etc. it is likely that the requirements for
receiving "safe harbor" status will be fairly easy to meet.
But, no matter how well the qualifications for safe-harbor
status are set, it seems to me that this sort of proposal is focusing
attention on the wrong part of the problem. A safe-harbor is really just
a way of identifying some set of senders whose traffic should be let
through whatever filters an ISP may put in place. But, the ultimate
decision concerning what traffic should and should not be accepted
remains with the actual owner of the mailbox. We can't let a focus on
the ISP's needs distract us from continuing to improve the ability that
users have to control what goes into the inboxes.
bob wyman
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg