1997-08-03 - Re: bulk postage fine (was Re: non-censorous spam control)

Header Data

From: ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} <dformosa@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
To: N/A
Message Hash: 6547c10cb3fc68cab0ba729b1dd1022a3f228c1588272c92708e0a93bd652c32
Message ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.970803121625.686J-100000@shirley>
Reply To: <199708030134.CAA13809@server.test.net>
UTC Datetime: 1997-08-03 06:40:28 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:40:28 +0800

Raw message

From: ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} <dformosa@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:40:28 +0800
Subject: Re: bulk postage fine (was Re: non-censorous spam control)
In-Reply-To: <199708030134.CAA13809@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.970803121625.686J-100000@shirley>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Adam Back wrote:

> David Formosa <dformosa@st.nepean.uws.edu.au> writes:


> > The best soultion given so far is Cause's suggestion of modifying
> > the fax law so that we can sue the spammers.
> Law, and suing and the internet don't mix.

You got to be jokeing, what about alomost every AOL vs. Cyberpromo or
Compuserve vs. Cyberpromo or all thouse other ISPs against Cyberpromo.

> Eg. Say I spam you via an anonymous remailer.  So now who are you
> going to sue?

The spammers if there advertising a servese will need someway for me to
contact them.  Some way for me to get the goods.  Just anonomising the
email will not hide there identy.  Any way pushing spammer email though
most email remailers will cause them to crash from sheare volume.

- -- 
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  ex-net.scum and proud
You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For
Themselves? --Terry Pratchett

Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv