[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> Declan McCullagh <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > -Declan
> >
> > (Who thinks that no consensual speech should be banned by the government.
>
> If you set up your mailbox to accept e-mail promiscuously from anyone,
> then anything sent to it is "consentual".
>
> > I can, however, see a common law argument for spam as trespass after
> > repeated cease-and-desist notes are sent.)
>
> The onus is on the recipient to filter out what they don't want (or to
> "filter in" only what they want, which is how I think we'll end up). Such
> filtering takes less time+effort than "repeated cease-and-desist notes".
Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make
filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs.
- Igor.