> Ok then. By that definition, logs would have to be examined to prove that > the spammer had indeed been spamming each person participating in the > counterattack. Those that had not received spam from the spammer would then > be prosecuted. > > However, juries/judges give someone the benefit of the doubt when in the > heat of the moment. When we have the time to make a rational decision > outside of the heat of the moment, and still decide to attack with intent to > damage another, I don't believe juries/judges will be as lenient.... since > there are other alternatives to defend without directly attacking. > > Darin. >
This 'legal system' mentality is pretty theoretical considering the current system does absolutely nothing to stop illegal spam activities currently in progress. To not do this based on fear of prosecution would be foolish and play right into the hands of the spammers. How does one not know that the system would silently welcome such a vigilante action so that they may focus on real world crimes and issues. Regards, Jason To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
