On 26/03/2015 23:34, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Hi, > > A followup: > > 1) has anyone been convicted under 303a StGB for suppressing email during > spam filtering? I bet not :) Its likely a law introduced to stop anally retentive jerks from having hissy fits and deleting other peoples data, thats unlawful, stopping deliberate spam, can be preventing stresses upon the recipient, so could be argued as lawful destruction of data, we really need a German lawyer (a real lawyer - not keyboard internet lawyer) to interpret the German law. Germany has the strongest data protection laws in the world, but I hardly doubt they were written with the intent of protecting spammer or abusive scum. > 2) How is rejecting with a 5xx code any less of a "suppression" of the > data than silently discarding with a 2xx code? In either case, the > recipient does not receive the mail. The fact that the sender is *aware* > of the non-receipt is immaterial. Are they? We both know 99% of deliberate spam which is likely to high score, is sent by spoofed addresses :)
