Re: RIPE32 Anti-spam WG minutes (draft 1.1)
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 05:51:55 GMT
- Organization: European Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email
On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 15:08:43 +0100, James Aldridge jhma@localhost wrote:
> DRAFT MINUTES (VERSION 1.1)
>
> Anti-Spam Working Group
> RIPE 32
> Chair: James Aldridge, EUnet
> Scribe: Raza Rizvi, REDNET
>
<snip>
>
> Clive Feather (Demon) gave a summary of the proposal for a EU Directive on
> ECommerce. This requires that the recipient of a message can indentify the
> sender of the mesage at reciept time. Liability of ISPs in the transfer of
> information has also been clarified.
>
> George Mills of The European Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email
> (http://www.euro.cauce.org) presented on the proposal for a EU Directive on
> ECommerce. This can be seen at
> http://www.ispo.cec.be/Ecommerce/legal.htm#legal
>
> In outline:
>
> What is a commercial communication
> Promotional offers must be identified
> Regulated Professions
> Electronic Contracts
> Liabilities of Intermediaries
> Mere Conduit
> Caching
> Hosting
> No obligation to monitor except for a specific purpose for limited time
> Once informed, must take immediate action
> Codes of Conduct
> Out of Court dispute settlement
> Court Action
> Cooperation between authorities
> Electronic Media
> Santions
> Exclusions
>
>
> If it goes past the proposal stage and is formally accepted, then it
> will be added to the journal of directives within 20 days and then be
> liable to enforcement by member states within 1 year.
>
> Article 6 and 7 are most pertinent to ISPs.
Most pertinent to this Working Group. (Article 6 requires identification
of advertiser, Article 7 requires label. "Mere conduit" and other
provisions limiting liability may be more pertinent to ISPs.)
>
> Modification to the USENET Path list might be construed as a change of
> message and make ISPs liable to collusion with the poster.
>
Shouldn't, unless the national law is badly written (this is possible).
> IRC/ICQ might count if they contain adverts.
>
Yup. Article 2 Paragraph e outlines what is and is not to be considered
"commercial communication."
GWM