[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       dmca-discuss
Subject:    [DMCA_Discuss] No, US antispam bill is not death to anonymity
From:       Seth Finkelstein <sethf () sethf ! com>
Date:       2003-11-23 21:28:29
[Download RAW message or body]

[Forwarded]
 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:37:59 -0500
 To: ip@v2.listbox.com
 From: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
 Subject: [IP] more on No, US antispam bill is not death to anonymity

 I am at a total loss to see how one enforces this in a world wide Internet. 
 Seems to me that it forces the off shore of the spam industry.  and does 
 little to eliminate spam. Australia says 75% of their spam comes from 
 China. How would this law help us again?

 Dave

   Delivered-To: dfarber+@ux13.sp.cs.cmu.edu
   Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:24:35 +0000
   From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
   Subject: Re: [IP] No, US antispam bill is not death to anonymity
   To: dave@farber.net
   Cc:
   
   > This bill makes it a crime to use any false or misleading
   > information in a domain name or email account application, and then
   > send an email.  That would make a large fraction of hotmail users
   > instant criminals.
   
   If you actually read the text of the bill, you'll see that it makes it
   illegal to send commercial email or transactional mail ("we shipped
   your order" or "your account balance is $19.34") with false or
   misleading header information.  The only Hotmail users who this would
   make into criminals are the ones who sign up for accounts and send
   spam to make your body parts bigger.
   
   Anonymous advertising is an oxymoron.  The point of ads is to get
   people to buy stuff, so only makers or vendors of the stuff that's
   advertised have an interest in doing so, and if they can't find you,
   they can't to buy from you.  I suppose this would make "astroturf"
   fake grass-roots campaigns harder, but I can't get too upset about
   that.
   
   Anonymous mail that isn't commercial isn't affected at all.  Don't
   take my word for it, read the act.  It's not that long.
   
   There's plenty wrong with the CAN SPAM act, but let's worry about its
   real faults, not imagined ones.
   
   Regards,
   John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
   Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner
   "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web

   Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

-- 
Seth Finkelstein  Consulting Programmer  sethf@sethf.com  http://sethf.com
DMCA win! - http://sethf.com/pipermail/infothought/2003-October/000002.html
Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/
_______________________________________________


------------------------
http://www.anti-dmca.org
------------------------

DMCA_Discuss mailing list
DMCA_Discuss@lists.microshaft.org
http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]