A few quick points:
1. Although both sides are right regarding "collateral damage" the
underlying problem right now is that the law (I'll talk about the US
tho I suspect these comments are so vague as to apply more broadly)
provides virtually no protection or even any effective process for
dealing with spam.
So some of the comments might be better pre-fixed with phrasing like
"in a civilized circumstance..." (we would do this, or we would do
that.)
Unfortunately the current circumstances aren't civilized and when you
get your 12 billionth spam from some 218.*.0.0 net and can't really
find anything non-spam coming from that /16 you just block it all
rather than having to accept one or more spams from each of its
apparent 16,000+ zombies before blocking them all in one fell swoop.
2. With all due respect (not much) I think this repeated argument that
BL's can't ("shouldn't" of course is in the realm of opium dens and
children's stories) be held liable is just nutso.
Repeating over and over and over that the only possible liable party
is the person/org using the blacklist is just happy horse****.
Imagine if I put up a web site with a list with your name and picture
on it under the heading "Known Pedophiles".
Why do you think we have slander, libel, incitement to riot, etc laws?
What about shouting fire in a crowded movie theater (that's not on
fire)?
C'mon, inducement, presenting yourself as some sort of authority on a
subject (who the spammers are) and giving out advice about others
(blacklists), can all have liability exposures so let's stop repeating
this embarrassingly naive idiocy as if repetition will make it
otherwise.
3. In a similar sense, I know because I was once involved in a case
revolving around this, that there is such a thing as an illegal
business boycott.
You can personally boycott any business you want, of course, who would
know. But when businesses boycott other business in a provably
organized way then anti-trust laws can come to bear. For example, I
(as an ISP) can't urge my supermarket to refuse to sell food to a
known spammer in the hope that he'll starve to death, that kind of
thing, it's illegal.
4. All that said I think it's all kinda hopeless when technical people
begin discussing the law, it quickly goes off into la-la-land; unlike
their code or math or things they know something about they don't even
know how to tell a good answer from a bad one and just begin shouting
louder hoping that'll save the day.
5. But you can rely on the fact that I'm always right.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs(_at_)TheWorld(_dot_)com |
http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
The World | Public Access Internet | Since 1989 *oo*
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg