On 9/21/07, Charles Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh, ok, I see here you essentially agree that what you wrote before was > plain wrong...
Not at all. Because in court, there is one plaintiff and one defendant. Anything relating to "bulk", doesnt neccessarily apply - because spams are typically sent to individual recipients. For whatever reason, you didn't quote me properly: > They have an excellent point, and thier definition is used as a > reference in many court cases. The primary factor being the defined > terminology of, "it's not about content, it's about consent". Since an email is sent to an individual recipient - where is the bulk, and how would you prove or refer to it in court? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list Assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
