On Monday 16 June 2003 19:00, you wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mix Sella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[deletia] > Should read: an ONLINE buletin board > > > > 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. > > Where did I state that? > You can't put an email address in "public domain". You can publish it in public place though. </pedant> [deletia] > > > 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 > > On the same ground a fax spammer can say that spam-fax doesn't really hurt > you because you get one free roll of paper from your fax supplier when you > got your fax. I wish it was correct but it's not. Not everywhere law recognizes email interchange as conversation, or even a media per se. Internet communications only recently began getting the same protection of law that the ``traditional'' means enjoyed. And let's face it, junk faxes aren't precisely a criminal offense either. > It does hurt me. It is interfering with my work. It is costing me (and my > company) expensive bandwidth. > So if you wanted to bring civil action against a spammer as an individual, how would you go? > > 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. > > This is not in the electronic domain - this is misleading business > advertisement. If you publish in a newspaper that you can buy herbal viagra > that works, the FTC / Israeli industry and commerce chambers would own your > ass. > Correct, but circumstances are different. Spammers went WAY beyond any ``misleading business advertisement''. Make-penis-fast and 419 are but rigorous evidence of such. While a company might actually try to lie to its customers and get slapped just to get back in check, spammers do it repeatedly, and knowingly. Spammers are not a branch of legitimate business gone horribly wrong - they as a whole are proof that business and profit is a *privilege* and not a right. > They should be prosecuted just like those who are outside of cyberspace. > Sure, the day there's Internet government and Internet taxes. But hey, I might get elected to the Ministry Of IP Allocation ;) > > > If you want to get legal, there's section 30-aleph of > > > > Israel's Bezeq's law, > > [deletia] > > > It can be argued that 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) > > The ones that have to do with the electronic domain. I agree. This is what > I am good at. Let the lawyers deal with the legal aspect of false > advertisement. "Fraud". The word is "fraud". > > > 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. > > Wrong, wrong, wrong. Enforcability is very much an option. It is very hard > to really hide on the internet. The touple (source ip address, time of > connection to mail server) is a one-to-one mapping to a specific physical > computer (when a TCP connection is involved, such as SMTP) or at least its > NAT zone boundary. The algorithm is very simple: > Let's see. > 1. Correlate the source IP address to the net block. > 1.1 Case privately owned space: > 1.1.1 set liable=owner(space) Hijacked netblock or a misconfigured mail server - who is liable? Is it criminal liability by a chance? > 1.2 Case ISP: > 1.2.1 use ISP billing records, IP and time to locate terminal Court subpoena -> issues of jurisdiction, privacy, assesment of damages. How do you obtain a subpoena that's valid for an ISP in Oregon while the spammer lives in Canada and you're in Kiryat Malachi? > 1.2.1.1 Case fixed endpoint: > 1.2.1.1.1 set liable=owner(endpoint) See 1.1.1 > 1.2.1.2 Case dial-up: > 1.2.1.2.1 use telco records and the time of the call to locate endpoint See court subpoena. > 1.2.1.2.2 set liable=owner(endpoint) > 1.3 Case ISP in a non-compliant country > 1.3.1 Collect evidence > 1.3.2 If enough evidence > 1.3.2.1 Filter port 25 from above entity for a month (or other corrective > measure) Right, that's a wonderful measure which actually works. bezeqint.net's been blacklisted in SPEWS for 2 months now. Let's just block ourselves now. > 1.3.3 exit > 2. Ask liable to defend itself > 3. If liable defends > 3.1 if defence checks out > 3.1.1 set liable=defence(liable) > 4. sue liable > And tell the court what? > > Consequently, should this argument be accepted and > > legislation based on it, > > nothing will improve but the problem would be considered solved. > > If there will be a task force with sufficient rights to execute the steps > in my algorithm without undue hinderance, it can work. It should not be a > local law, but rather an international treaty. We have enough international copyright treaties to think twice about affording another one. The solution to the technical side of the problem is to drop SMTP. The solution of the social problem is way, way beyond the scope of this conversation. Hint: it involves radical review of the society and its structure. -- "I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" ================================================================= 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]
