This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] how to detect spambots - SPAMTrusted
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] how to detect spambots - SPAMTrusted
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] how to detect spambots - SPAMTrusted
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ian Eiloart
iane at sussex.ac.uk
Mon Mar 9 17:25:09 CET 2009
--On 4 March 2009 17:43:50 +0100 Frank Gadegast <ripe-anti-spam-wg at powerweb.de> wrote: > >> Thats where I believe you are not entirely correct. UBE is permitted in >> my country (not all types of course, greasy ones etc). (.cx) > > Well not in ours. (.de) In the UK, unsolicited electronic marketing messages are illegal - bulk or otherwise - when they're sent to personal addresses. There's guidance on "unsolicited", "marketing", and "personal". Unsolicited Business to Business marketing is permitted. The law applies to all electronic messaging, not just email. The term marketing is broadly defined, and includes messages soliciting votes in elections, and charity appeals. Furthermore, a "simple means of opting out" must be supplied with EVERY marketing message. For example, even SMS messages usually carry an opt out message like "text STOP to nnnnn". I think it's sensible apply the law without regard to quantity, for several reasons: 1. The recipient can't know whether the message is "Bulk" or not, and they should be able to make a complaint based on information that they have access to. A message doesn't annoy a recipient less when they're the only recipient - at least not if they don't know that. 2. It would be hard to define "Bulk", given that senders can send variants of messages, and can send them at staggered intervals. The higher the threshold is set, the harder it is to obtain evidence to convict. 3. Bulk mailers are inherently more likely to attract complaints. They're more likely to have complaints against them upheld, and penalties are likely to be more serious. Therefore there's no necessity to add legislative discrimination. On the other hand, they may have more resources to defend an action against them. -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex x3148
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] how to detect spambots - SPAMTrusted
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] how to detect spambots - SPAMTrusted
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]