Hi Phillip,
Thanks for your legal information. Do you know if in the "US Law"
case, the ISP had recipient permission to delete the email, and what
"identified as spam" actually meant (and whether or not provisions for
making mistakes were mentioned)?
I'm Australian, and we have no such precedent, but we have very
different laws relating to emails than those that US people have,
including (as I mentioned) criminal penalties for interfering,
intercepting, reading-without-permission, and even forwarding without
sender permission.
As a PKI-aware person, do you know if anyone is doing any anti-spam
PKI work, like any paid-for "I am not a spammer" certificate system or
other PKI-based anti-spam solutions? I think this would be an ideal
alternative to SPF, since it gives SENDERS a way to ensure their
emails reach their recipients - and the rights of senders are getting
totally lost in todays anti-spam frenzy.
Kind Regards,
Chris Drake
-------
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?¡