From: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 06:45:31 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: San Francisco Editorial
In-Reply-To: <199501032244.OAA15281@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Message-ID: <Qj2fAKT0Eyt5BUJxh8@nsb.fv.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


A letter to the editor is like spitting into the wind in this case.   I
think what's needed is a more constructive affirmative action, ideally
taking Cantor and Siegel to court somewhere.

I know that there was an FCC ruling in 1993 that has saved me LOADS of
annoyance from telephone sales calls, because now if you get such a call
and you formally request to be taken off their dialing lists, you can
actually SUE them if they call you again.  As a result, they now tend to
take you very seriously when you make such a request in a knowledgable
fashion.  Does anyone know if there might be a similar legal case to be
made against net spammers who persist after being warned?  I suspect
that it's easy to make such a case for email spamming, but probably not
for spamming of umoderated newsgroups.

Note that I speak entirely for myself here, not for my employers.  -- Nathaniel