Re: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

Declan McCullagh <declan@pathfinder.com> writes:

...

-Declan

(Who thinks that no consensual speech should be banned by the government.

If you set up your mailbox to accept e-mail promiscuously from anyone, then anything sent to it is "consentual".

...

I can, however, see a common law argument for spam as trespass after repeated cease-and-desist notes are sent.)

The onus is on the recipient to filter out what they don't want (or to "filter in" only what they want, which is how I think we'll end up). Such filtering takes less time+effort than "repeated cease-and-desist notes".

Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs. - Igor.