[eff-austin] Antispam Bills: Worse Than Spam?

John Kozubik john at kozubik.com
Sat Aug 2 17:45:36 PDT 2003


On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 mindfuq at comcast.net wrote:

> > > Legitimate email - deliver as intended.   non-legitimate email - block the
> > > connection at the server.
> >
> > Do we need laws for that?
>
> We definately need a law making it illegal for an ISP to block
> non-spam email.  I cannot email a friend who uses AOL, and wants to
> receive my email, because AOL blocks it.  The only law out there to

That is incorrect.  AOL owns their network, and they can respond to your
arbitrary communications on their network in any way they see fit.  Maybe
they will deliver your email to your AOL subscribing friend.  Maybe they
will block that email.  Maybe they will translate the email into French
and reverse the word-order and then send it to your friend.  Maybe they
will print it out and mail it back to you for no reason.  All of these
responses are perfectly legitimate, and represent a private entity using
their property in whatever way they see fit, _provided that_ they abide by
any contracts they have entered into with their subscriber (which, in this
case, is not you).

It amazes me how many people on this list only respect private property
when it is convenient for them to do so.  (For reference, see the "Tim May
argues (correctly) that people can't protest in his house" and, more
recently, the "Gilmore thinks airlines can't refuse him travel for any
reason they see fit"  threads)

-----
John Kozubik - john at kozubik.com - http://www.kozubik.com





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list