In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 05/24/2007
at 12:42 PM, Ron Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>As is my want, I always respond with a terse opinion of spam when it
>appears to be a "real email address." His response is that some wacko
>bill in the US defines it as non-spam because it has unsubscribe
>tagged to the bottom.
That's what antispammers refer to as a Murk; the bill says no such
thing.
Rule 1: spammers lie.
Rule 2: if you think that a spammer might be telling the truth, see
Rule 1.
It's true that S877 removed the right to private action against
spammers that was in some US state laws, but it did *not* define spam
and it did *not* legalize it.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
