On Jun 9, 2010, at 2:05 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote: > On 6/9/2010 15:56, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >> On Jun 9, 2010, at 8:26 AM, Brielle Bruns wrote: >> >>> On 6/9/10 6:27 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote: >>>> Going back then to a previous question, do we want more/any regulation ? >>> >>> Laws and regulation exist because people can't behave civilly and be >>> expected to respect the rights/boundries/property others. >>> >>> CAN-SPAM exists because the e-mail marketing business refused to self >>> regulate and respect the wishes of consumers/administrators >>> >> Which is good, because it certainly eliminated most of the SPAM. -- NOT! > > It is actually an outstanding example of something of something I spoke > of here earlier. > > Without any exception that I know of, regulations are written to protect > the entrenched. CAN-SPAM was written to protect spammers, not to > prevent anything important to them. > Actually, as much as it would make so much more sense if that were the case, it simply isn't true. CAN-SPAM was written to be a compromise that was supposed to allow consumers to opt out of receiving SPAM and prevent SPAMMERs from sending unwanted messages.
Sadly, of course, it hasn't done either one. Owen > -- > Somebody should have said: > A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. > > Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting > the vote. > > Requiescas in pace o email > Ex turpi causa non oritur actio > Eppure si rinfresca > > ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs > http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml > >