Diff: LegislatingAgainstSpam

Differences between current version and predecessor to the previous major change of LegislatingAgainstSpam.

Other diffs: Previous Revision, Previous Author, or view the Annotated Edit History

Newer page: version 29 Last edited on Wednesday, June 23, 2004 4:12:44 pm by MatthiasDallmeier
Older page: version 27 Last edited on Friday, June 18, 2004 9:23:54 am by JohnMcPherson Revert
@@ -80,8 +80,10 @@
 PerryLorier: It is not the content of the emails which is a problem, it is the number of them that cause the issue. Waking up and finding another 50 emails that are irrelevant to me if they are commercial in nature or not is my problem. 
 MatthewBrowne: No exceptions. Like Perry says, the content of the messages does not matter. 
+MatthiasDallmeier: No exceptions. And this should be extended to cover phone calls as well.  
 !! 8. Should the legislation extend to coverage of acts done overseas? If so, what acts should be covered? 
 zcat(1); 'follow the money' - If the the spam benefits a New Zealand 'entity', it should make no difference that they hired some kid in Romania to send their mail via hacked Chinese servers. The same applies if a New Zealander organises the spamming on behalf of an overseas client. And I personally feel that it should also apply if a New Zealander, through lack of appropriate care and computer maintenence, allows their computer to become a 'spam relay' for someone else.. 
@@ -161,8 +163,10 @@
 MatthewBrowne: I don't think you guys have read the question. I most definitely disagree that any software should be illegal to use. DeCSS anyone? 
 PerryLorier: I'm against address lists, I'm not against address list software. It's the action which makes it illegal. 
+MatthiasDallmeier: Sorry, let me try again now that I have actually read the question: I am for freedom of expression, but also for gun control. Anyway, I stand by my original comment that "e-mail addresses should never be passed on to anyone without the expressed permission of their owner," possibly with small exceptions allowing friends, family, and business partners to pass along your e-mail address if it is in your interest to make Oliver happy. This is all about privacy for me. Moving right along to software: If the only use for software is address harvesting, it might help if it was only allowed to be distributed as source code for educational purposes, but address harvesting is not rocket science. In the end, all that matters is what you do with your software, like Perry said.  
 !! 18. Who should be able to bring an action against an alleged spammer? 
 MatthiasDallmeier: Anyone who is actually affected by their action.