On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:56:52 EDT, Richard Shockey
<rshockey(_at_)ix(_dot_)netcom(_dot_)com> said:
Ladies and Gentlemen I'm rather dismayed that I have not heard any rational
response to the suggestion by my distinguished colleague Mr. Wing that the
elements of Title 47 aka the junk fax laws could not be made applicable to
unsolicited SMTP traffic. Many European Countries have similar laws.
It's not just a matter of saying 'e-mail is legally fax', as
there's implications you need to chase down and deal with.
In particular, I suggest that you also read 47 USC 227(d)(1)(B),
which states:
(d) Technical and procedural standards
(1) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for any person within the United States -
(A) ....
(B) to use a computer or other electronic device to send any
message via a telephone facsimile machine unless such person
clearly marks, in a margin at the top or bottom of each
transmitted page of the message or on the first page of the
transmission, the date and time it is sent and an
identification of the business, other entity, or individual
sending the message and the telephone number of the sending
machine or of such business, other entity, or individual.
Be careful what you ask for, you may get it....
(Hint - was *your* e-mail stamped with the originating phone number at the
top of each page? ;)
For bonus points - what phone number should be used to fulfill the
requirements
of 227(d)(1)(B) if it's an RFC2159 format email that never actually went
near a dialed telephone line? Does your answer change any if I retrieve
said message via PPP over a dialup modem?
There be serious and nasty dragons here...
I'm sorry if you understood my post to mean "replace 'facsimile' with
'email' and we're saved from spammers". I certainly didn't intend to
have that meaning.
-d