Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Friday, April 25, 2014 02:26:22 Martin Rex wrote:
>>
>> The DMARC policy scheme is actually censoring of a telecommunication
>> between a messge sender and a message receiver through a telecommunications
>> provider by some _outside_ third party.  So in the US a p=reject DMARC
>> policy might potentially be freedom of speech (1st Amendment) violation.
> 
> No idea about the rest of it, but this is nonsense.  The 1st Amendment to the 
> constitution is a restriction on government action, not on private action.  
> See http://xkcd.com/1357/ .

OK.  I'm terribly sorry for you across the pond then.

In the German constitution and in the European Human Rights Convention
this is a basic right, and it protects not just from your own government,
but also from private actors and other governments.

-Martin





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]