On Tue, 13 Aug 2002 23:54:33 -0400 (EDT) "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu> wrote:
> So maybe we need something that a spammer *could* lookup against before
> sending emails, but can't use the ack/no-ack to get email addresses. And
> then we make failing to do so an offense. And then start campaigning to
> get this law -- which as it's less Draconian is also less controversial
> --
> adopted all over.
this has been proposed before, and attempts at implementation have been
made.
Rodney Joffe set one up that was rather nicely done. it was really too
nicely done and included features like "domain wide" opt out that most of
us think are absolutely necessary. the DMA (direct marketing association)
countered with a much lamer and more difficult to use system, and also made
sure that it was a voluntary system.
prerequsites for an effective system:
1) ease of use (the DMA system was very difficult, they would do telephone
confirmations weeks after the initial web form submission)
2) domain wide opt out (it seems to me that GE should be able to ban spam
from their corporate network in one swell foop, for example)
3) a single list; you should only have to opt out once
4) mandatory use (at least, by those within jurisdiction)
semi reasonable options:
1) individual opt-out of opt-out (an ISP might opt out, but then customers
who actually wanted spam could flip this on an individual basis)
2) finer edged control (i only want viagra spam, not feature enhancement
spam)
richard
--
Richard Welty rwelty@averillpark.net
Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592
Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security