ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists

2014-04-24 20:50:56
On Thursday, April 24, 2014 18:41:12 Douglas Otis wrote:
On Apr 24, 2014, at 5:44 PM, Scott Kitterman <scott(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> 
wrote:
On Friday, April 25, 2014 02:26:22 Martin Rex wrote:
...

The DMARC policy scheme is actually censoring of a telecommunication
between a messge sender and a message receiver through a
telecommunications
provider by some _outside_ third party.  So in the US a p=reject DMARC
policy might potentially be freedom of speech (1st Amendment) violation.

No idea about the rest of it, but this is nonsense.  The 1st Amendment to
the constitution is a restriction on government action, not on private
action. See http://xkcd.com/1357/ .

Dear Scott,

Strongly disagree.  The US government failed to protect citizen's rights by
not declaring ISPs common carriers.  People's ability to meet and freely
associate is now being steadily eroded by policies hostile to decades of
neighborhood and small communities' normal meeting practices. This has
nothing to do with someone being abusive and shunned.  This is about ISPs
taking greater control over content carried on the Internet.  The usurping
of control over Internet use is very likely to put democracy in greater
peril as content control is taken over by an oligarchy.

I didn't say it was a good idea.  I said it wasn't unconstitutional.  No all 
constitutional ideas are good ones.  It's a case of law, not fundamental 
rights.

Scott K

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>