on 8/15/2002 9:12 PM Perry E. Metzger wrote: > Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu> writes: > I no longer believe that. NPR's All Things Considered, for example, > had a 12 minute three part story on spam this evening, and their view > on legislation seemed very positive. One of the reporters noted that > she'd received a dozen spams today alone. Average people are being > impacted, which means the Direct Marketing Association will soon be > arguing with a torch-wielding mob. http://search.npr.org/cf/cmn/segment_display.cfm?segID=148399 has the NPR realaudio segment, or one of them anyway. The DMA wasn't mentioned so maybe its another one. The segment isn't very educational, although there was one especially salient quote from a spammer: "I don't see where we're doing something wrong, and if there was something wrong, why aren't there any federal laws pertaining to it". Which is exactly why we need the law, so that the deficient can be told that it's wrong. http://www.the-dma.org/cgi/dispannouncements?article=158 has the DMA guidelines. They might as well be non-existent. The guidelines allow the members to send you unsolicited mail even if they only got your address from somebody who claims that you received an opt-out message which you did not respond to (guideline 4b). This is, of course, the favorite blanket of the THIS-IS-NOT-SPAM crowd. This is in direct contrast to the public face the DMA puts on when they feel the heat. As far back as 1998, they have publicly stated that they favor opt-in (see http://news.com.com/2100-1023-218803.html). Earlier this year, they made a stink about their rules and that members would be booted if they weren't followed (see http://news.com.com/2100-1023-822053.html). Read their policies at their own web site for the private face. -- Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/