On 23 Sep 2021 23:26:12 -0400, John Levine via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>
wrote:
>Do you really want to negotiate with every spammer who complains
>you're blocking his stuff, as 321.114(a) requires? How much free time
>do you have?
Plenty. I'm retired.
However, given that the quoted statute claims to govern "intentionally
imped[ing] the transmission of another persons electronic mail message based
on the content of the message", there is nothing to discuss.
The content was not taken into account in the blockage. The fact that the
message constituted theft of service was taken into account: the user did not
give actual or constructive consent to the sender to use their resources for
the sender's benefit. In the case of many of the recipients, they failed to
give consent because they fail to exist.
Even former Republicans should have some idea of property rights.
mdr
--
"There are no laws here, only agreements."
-- Masahiko
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
