[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Re: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes blacklisting spammers
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: RE: Re: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes blacklisting spammers
- From: Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 14:02:56 -0700
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
That's a lotta work for one spammer that I can simply delete. OTOH, those
on aol can get hundreds daily and that makes doing it not feasible. That's
the basic problem with SPAM, SPAM, SPAM, SPAM, Wonderful SPAM, WOnderful
SPAM, <Monty Python stream of consciousness stopped>
Noah silva <email@example.com>
Sent by: firstname.lastname@example.org
10/19/01 12:43 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss
Subject: RE: Re: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes blacklisting spammers
That's true, I was thinking more of the places that want you to buy
If you can call or email them or buy from a website, then you can call,
or email them, look up their service provider, figure out their home
address, etc. If you can buy from their website, then you can look up who
owns the domain in NSI, who's merchant account is being used, etc.
-- noah silva
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org wrote:
> Not necessarily. Lots of adult websites send out spam with their URLs.
> Contacting them via the URL doesn't help you determine who actually
> spammed you. It's another layer of obfuscation and deniability.
> Noah silva <email@example.com>
> Sent by: firstname.lastname@example.org
> 10/19/01 11:22 AM
> Please respond to dvd-discuss
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: RE: Re: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes
> yes, but the amusing thing is that they always have to include some form
> of contact if they expect you to actually purchase anything from them.
> -- noah silva
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Bryan Taylor wrote:
> > --- Richard Hartman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Moreover, spamming is not an excercise of free-speech. It is an
> > > attempt at free advertising. Basically, they are getting something
> > > for nothing. They are (generally) trying to sell something, and
> > > not have to pay to advertise it.
> > Well, advertising IS a form of speech. The real problem is when they
> > headers or any of the other dirty tricks spammers use. I call this
> > advertising or even fraud. This is a categrory of speech that isn't
> > and can be regulated. Ultimately deceptive trade practices are an
> attempt to
> > steal.
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> > http://personals.yahoo.com