On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, John Franklin wrote: > I am in no way an advocate of spam, but I think there are some serious > issues with how spam is being fought, especially in this case. The > concept that you can be charged in a jurisdiction because the data went > through a machine there is wrong. It would be like charging a winery > because the truck with their shipment went through a dry county.
No, it's not. The truck driving through a dry county left no damage behind. A spammer pushing mail through an out-of-state server is putting load on that server that requires more exotic hardware than a server that never has to handle spam. There is also the added personell costs as sysadmins must deal directly or indirectly with the repercussions of the spam entering the server. This is more like a man in North Carolina lobbing a mortar shell over the Virginia state line. Should he be tried in NC for the damage he did in VA? -- TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/ TriLUG PGP Keyring : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
