Re: Lawsuits, angry business users, and SPF stupidity.

Chris Drake wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I hate spam, but just like 99% of all other business email users, I
> can *never* afford to loose even as much as *one* email - EVER.
Oh dear oh dear. Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

> I strongly object to you guys forcing my ISP to trash my incoming
> email without my permission.  I VERY strongly object to you guys
> forcing my recipients ISP to trash my incoming emails without my
> permission.
We're not forcing anyone to do anything, nor do we wish to.
However many times you say it.

> What advice are you giving to people implementing SPF as to their
> legal risk when they trash legitimate customer emails?
Every responsible ISP already has a legal policy on spam management. It 
is not our job to teach them that.
> As publishers of software and standards which perform criminal+illegal
> activities, and immoral purpose
That's an astoundingly subjective viewpoint.

> (erasing emails without sender or
> recipient consent), what do you believe your own legal risk to be?
Significantly less than the proven risk of black-hole providers or 
mail-management service providers; ie, none - because *we* do nothing to 
your email. What your ISP does to mail with open standards is their call 
entirely.
You might as well threaten to sue Belkin for manufacturing the keyboard 
that some cracker uses when breaking into a site.
> Finally, I run a (pay only, non-spam) personal remailler service which
> legitimately maintains the real senders address (and due to MDN/DSN
> standards, must maintain it in the envelope as well as other areas).
SPF was initially proposed by a remailer service.

> You SPF idea has the potential to (A) Destroy my legitimate business,
> along with everyone else who operates anything similar, and (B) Puts
> me at legal risk due to my customer emails not reaching their intended
> recipients due to your SPF foolishness.  Should I ever get sued, I will
> be forced to try and recover costs from someplace - either the
> recipient ISP, or the SPF software authors (the latter being the most
> likely, since the ISP will hide behind that excuse or risk criminal
> prosecution as well).
This has to be the least scary attempt at legal scare tactics I've ever 
seen. The responsibility for email delivery is established to lie with 
the ISP, and many of them already implement anti-spam measures.
The rest of your email I shall ignore, as there is no prize for "most 
incorrent assertions in an email" on this list.
        Wechsler

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡