Differences between version 28 and predecessor to the previous major change of LegislatingAgainstSpam.
Other diffs: Previous Revision, Previous Author, or view the Annotated Edit History
| Newer page: | version 28 | Last edited on Wednesday, June 23, 2004 4:07:03 pm | by MatthiasDallmeier | Revert |
| Older page: | version 27 | Last edited on Friday, June 18, 2004 9:23:54 am | by JohnMcPherson | Revert |
@@ -161,8 +161,10 @@
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.
