Re: Proposed EU Directive on Electronic Commerce

["Clive D.W. Feather" <]

Piet Beertema said:
>     	First of all there's a wild variety of user mailers,
>     	lots of which don't allow users to add X- header lines.
>     	Go tell it the developers of those mailers.
>     Irrelevant if a law requires X-UCE headers.
> Then it has to be law that applies *worldwide*.

Wrong. See other messages in this thread.

>     	Third, spammers hide themselves and cover their tracks.
>     	No EC Directive is going to change that.
>     Some will be deterred by the fact that they will be
>     committing an offence. Some will not.
> How many spammers are deterred by those US laws
> that forbid spam?

Hard to tell. But at least some. Does failure to reach 100% mean that
nothing should be done ?

>     	Which means that the filtering would have to be done by
> 	the user, *not* by his/her ISP: it might well even become
> 	illegal for the ISP to do such filtering!
>     False. The user can authorise the ISP to filter on
>     her behalf. And I see nothing requiring the ISP to
>     offer an unfiltered feed either.
> Agreed. But authorisation by definition makes
> filtering a legal act.

In other words, exactly the opposite of what you just said.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather       | Email: clive@localhost   | Tel: +44 1733 705000
Regulation Officer       | Home:  clive@localhost |  or: +44 973 377646
London Internet Exchange |                           | Fax: +44 1733 353929