From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:58:35 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: NetAction -- another big government "cyberliberty" group
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970605004410.12266B-100000@well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



*sigh* --Declan


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Audrie Krause <akrause@igc.apc.org>
To: declan@well.com
Cc: fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Micro$oft Monitor: Sidewalk Spam

Sorry, Declan, I don't share your rather naive belief that industry is going
to regulate itself.  

At 01:37 AM 6/1/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>Glad to see Net Action is pointing out potential privacy violations or
>potential for spam (though there seems to be no evidence saying Microsoft
>in fact has sent such spam).
>
>But what I find interesting is that NetAction is using the Net, the
>press, the media to broadcast Microsoft's bad privacy policies. Then
>people can choose to visit or not, or to read the notice more carefully.
>
>Thus I see no need for FTC rulemaking. I hope that is what NetAction will
>be saying to the FTC. Etrust is another solution NetAction should support.
>