From: turner@telecheck.com
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 95 12:29:14 PDT
To: Jim Ray <liberty@gate.net>
Subject: Re: (noise) Re: SPAM bait
In-Reply-To: <199509161913.PAA55049@tequesta.gate.net>
Message-ID: <9509181927.AA18728@TeleCheck.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> nobody@alpha.c2.org (Anonymous) wrote: 
> <snip>
> >
> >Don't worry, "Janet Dove", or actually sanghi3@grfn.org got mailbombed
> >severely for this one.  I'm just glad he doesn't know how to use remailers.
> 
> Good going, Anonymous. What I don't understand about inappropriate
> SPAMs like that one (or telephone ads) is; what's the business
> incentive to do it? I assume that no Cypherpunk has subscribed to
 <snip>
> JMR
> 

I'm no lawyer (and probably wouldn't admit to it if I was.. ;) ) but
in most states there are laws restricting advertisement wherein the
target of the advertising does not have to pay for the privledge of
being advertised to.  I beleive this came about right after FAX machines
started taking off, and people were sending out advertisments wasting
fax paper and jamming telephone lines.

Can't this be applied to the internet?  I believe someone sued Visa
when he was forced to receive junk e-mail on CompuServe (I think he
even won.) Anyone have any info on this?