1997-05-09 - Re: Spam Update/Cyber Promo attacked

Header Data

From: tzeruch@ceddec.com
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 52324848852e85e06230920d13e5dd14c4e47c4de36136af7c058bf1a1770edd
Message ID: <97May9.132052edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Reply To: <FPRF7D57w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-05-09 17:50:47 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 01:50:47 +0800

Raw message

From: tzeruch@ceddec.com
Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 01:50:47 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Spam Update/Cyber Promo attacked
In-Reply-To: <FPRF7D57w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <97May9.132052edt.32257-1@brickwall.ceddec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

One simple question: where is the property right to a socket and mailbox.

If Wallace has the right to fill my computer with unwanted data, then I
have the same right toward his.  If it is an act of free speech to send
some commercial solicitation for something I would never want, it is hard
not to maintain that an ARP packet isn't covered by the same theory.

It costs me something to filter out spam, and will cost him something to
filter out counterspam of whatever sort.  The NSP may be in the no-man's
land between the trenches, but they are providing the connection and can
tell him to look elsewhere or charge a premium for the extra traffic.