On Monday 16 June 2003 17:48, Arik Baratz wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 5:32 PM > > [snip] > > > Regarding spam, > > One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. > > One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without > > the knowing, of > > the owner is breaking the law. > > I again beg to differ. > > Let's try the real-world example of you posting your address on a buletin > board for, say, giving private lessons. >
Bad analogy. A local bulletin board is not the vast searchable space of All Internet. > Someone reads it and emails you for help in Algebra. That's fine. > > What's not fine is someone taking this address (which you put in the public > domain) You don't. Email address is not a commodity, a e-mailbox is not a property. Not due the current laws anyway. > and using it to cause you damage (i.e. spam you, make you pay for > the bandwidth). Another legal problem. Spam doesn't really HURT me and it doesn't really do damage that would be admissible in court. The problem with spam is much more subtle than just advertising hitting your mailbox per se. The problem is that commercial entities willingfully and knowingly deceive their potential customers by acting as if they had a *right* to sell/make a profit. > > If you want to get legal, there's section 30-aleph of Israel's Bezeq's law, > saying that if you want to send a fax message to someone, you have to get > their consent. The rational behind this law is that a fax owner pays for > the reception of the fax message (paper, fax toner). Correct me if I am wrong but this only applies to services transmitted over or terminated at Bezeq property. How about SMS? How about snail mail? > > It can be argued that the same may apply for spam - because the recipient > pays for the bandwidth (even if the payment is flat-rate). > This is a bad argument. 1) Logic - it deals only with the secondary consequences of the problem and not with the root premises of it (see above) 2) Enforceability - while legal action against junk fax spammers is enforceable due to the way POTS networks are build, it is not so in the chaos of All Internet. Spammers get nailed mostly due to their stupidity. Consequently, should this argument be accepted and legislation based on it, nothing will improve but the problem would be considered solved. > Take a look at: > > http://www.law.co.il/showarticles.php?d=h&cat=33&abtd=1 > > Some very nice articles about world-wide spam with the Israeli POV. > > -- Arik > ********************************************************************** > This email and attachments have been scanned for > potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. > Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. > www.vidius.com > ********************************************************************** > > ================================To unsubscribe, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message > body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mix Sella (well, not really but hey) This mail was checked for viruses by Romat email server ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
