Re: Proposed EU Directive on Electronic Commerce, Beebit tmills@localhost
- Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 14:24:45 +0100
What I tried to say, even if I failed to express myself, was that
an EC law enforcing a spam label that can be identified by machines
is a good step forward.
A good theoretical step forward. Practice tends to be a
*lot* more stubborn though, especially because it will
be the *user* who has to put the "stamp" on a message,
not his/her system.
If more nations, and namely the US, could then be made to do the
same thing, we'd have a powerful tool in fighting spam.
Again: such a tool won't be very powerful against the
spammers who cover their identity and tracks. But that
happens to be the vast majority of spammers.
An EC law will make it easier for anti-spam activists in the US to
put pressure on US lawmakers to create something similar there.
Perhaps US lawmakers would look at the practical effects
instead of the theoritical ones.
It has the *potential* to reduce spam drastically.
Yes, it has, as a tool. Now the "only" thing to be done,
once it's in effect, is to convince/force spammers to
actually use it; and at the same time not cover their
identity and tracks.
If the ISP implements the customers' filters for them or not is
completely irrelevant and something between the ISP and its customers.
Agreed.
"being forced to deliver 'legal' spam" is a really weird notion...
Not so weird at all. How much "legal spam" does your
postal service drop into your mailbox every day?
The user pays the ISP to deliver the user's mail. If the user wants
UCE, the ISP will have to deliver just that. If not, the ISP can filter
it out.
We don't disagree on that. But here UCE is the same
as "legal spam".
Piet
