[anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
peter h
peter at hk.ipsec.se
Fri Aug 17 08:30:36 CEST 2012
On Thursday 16 August 2012 22.07, lists at help.org wrote: > >Email spam is universally defined as unsolicited bulk email. > > You need a definition that can withstand a court challenge. Grouping > vague, undefined terms does not do the trick. If I post my e-mail > address in a whois database or post it on a web site am I soliciting > e-mail? How many is "bulk"? So if I send you, and only you, an ad > after I collect your address from this list it is not "spam" because I > did not send it in bulk? When you get a single message, using your > definition, you can't tell if it is spam because you don't know if it > was sent in "bulk" (whatever that means). Even if you see similar > reports from many different sources if they came from different IP's you > still can't tell if it was spam because if different people sent the > messages it may not qualify as "bulk." I don't know anyone that > actually uses such a standard, in practice, to define "spam." > One advetsiment sent without my explicit demand is by definition spam. There is no greyzone! > > -- Peter Håkanson There's never money to do it right, but always money to do it again ... and again ... and again ... and again. ( Det är billigare att göra rätt. Det är dyrt att laga fel. )
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]