[Dshield] Idea for dealing with ISPs that ignore abusenotificatons was RE: The Art/Tao/Zen of Abuse e-mails (Was:[Fwd: WHY IS YOURCUSTOMER...])

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Mon Aug 28 04:54:13 GMT 2006


On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:51:19 EDT, "Dregier, Leo A. (CMS/CTR)" said:

> While I like the topic, I think the whole industry would have to change
> in regards how it deals with SPAM.  What about freedom of speech?  Your
> essentially filtering it!  While I hate SPAM like the rest,  I'm
> personally interested in brainstorming further on the subject.

The freedom of speech includes the freedom not to listen.  There's never been
an interpretation of "free speech" that includes your right to generate costs
on my part for things I don't want to hear.  Postal mail, the sender has to
pay for the stamp - with e-mail, the receiver carries a lot of the burden.

That point actually matters.

> The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user of the
> e-mail address to which it was addressed and may also be privileged. If
> you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may not copy, forward,
> disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any form whatsoever.

Point out to your legal eagles that this is *really* stupid on e-mail sent to
a worldwide mailing list - as it isn't *addressed* to any of the actual
*recipients*.  As such, I'm technically abusing the "or otherwise use it" clause
in order to reply to your note.  Ah well.. Should I follow your implied request
in "I'm interested in brainstorming further" and hit send, or the explicit
"do not use" request and hit cancel?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.dshield.org/pipermail/list/attachments/20060828/5da801ea/attachment.bin 


More information about the list mailing list