Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Dnia 25.09.2021 o godz. 21:33:41 John Levine via mailop pisze: > I believe you but I don't know how typical that is. In the US, most > land registries allow free online searches. Property assesment info > is also usually available. I can download a PDF that shows the owner, > assessed value, and

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Ahoj, Dňa Sat, 25 Sep 2021 12:11:19 +0200 Alessandro Vesely via mailop napísal: > On Fri 24/Sep/2021 19:55:51 +0200 Slavko Via Mailop wrote: > > Good analogy, as street is as public as the Internet is. You do not > > answer if are you publishing your identity on the street. > > Yes, you have

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

It appears that yuv via mailop said: >First, "open." Here in Ontario, where I have write-privilege on the >Land Registry (I register deeds, mortgages, and all sorts of other >instruments for my clients), the cost of accessing the record is >substantial enough to dissuade the equivalent of a spamm

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Dnia 25.09.2021 o godz. 12:07:03 Alessandro Vesely via mailop pisze: > > I'm not sure the disappearance of WHOIS data was mandated by GDPR. > Lots of domains had anonymous contacts even before, as an initiative > of the relevant registrars. Then, all of a sudden, WHOIS servers > were disabled. A

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

> On 25 Sep 2021, at 11:07, Alessandro Vesely via mailop > wrote: > > On Fri 24/Sep/2021 13:44:49 +0200 Jaroslaw Rafa wrote: >> Dnia 24.09.2021 o godz. 13:36:28 Sidsel Jensen via mailop pisze: >>> >>> I think you misunderstood what Michael wrote. I think he was referring to >>> the changes in

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On Fri 24/Sep/2021 13:44:49 +0200 Jaroslaw Rafa wrote: Dnia 24.09.2021 o godz. 13:36:28 Sidsel Jensen via mailop pisze: I think you misunderstood what Michael wrote. I think he was referring to the changes in WHOIS, which makes it harder to find correlating abusers, since the data is now hidden

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On Fri 24/Sep/2021 19:55:51 +0200 Slavko Via Mailop wrote: Dňa Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:36:23 -0400 Bill Cole via mailop napísal: On 2021-09-24 at 11:50:24 UTC-0400 (Fri, 24 Sep 2021 17:50:24 +0200) Slavko via mailop is rumored to have said: While i cannot comment mentioned OVH domain, i will a

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On Fri, 2021-09-24 at 12:36 -0400, Bill Cole via mailop wrote: > Owning an operational domain name makes you a public person. [...] > In many places (including the US and at least some European > countries) you can only own land if your 'title' to that land is > registered with the government in an

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/22/22688331/texas-hb-20-first-amendment-lawsuit-social-media-censorship though not over the email spam provision at this time. The text of the law contains the usual severability provisions, but I won't make any predictions what, if any, parts of this survive til D

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

on Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:36:23PM -0400, Bill Cole via mailop wrote: > Owning an operational domain name makes you a public person. A > domain name is a claim on a specific piece of the public commons of > the DNS. In many places (including the US and at least some European > countries) you can on

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

I seem to have plenty of time for nuance. I value privacy for my customers, very little for myself. I'm routinely annoyed by the anonymity of career spammers, which is exactly why I know they'll never meet me in a court room. They'd have to give it up. On 2021-09-24 23:05, Luke via mailop wrot

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 9/24/21 3:05 PM, Luke via mailop wrote: Its 2021. What does the year have to do with it? You either love privacy or you hate privacy. Pick a side. I love using privacy from a personal / individual stand point. I dislike (but don't hate) privacy from a network administrator's standpoint

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Its 2021. You either love privacy or you hate privacy. Pick a side. Who has time for nuance. On Fri, Sep 24, 2021, 1:11 PM Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote: > > What will be better with my services, when i publish my name? Do you > > know me? What will prevent me to publish fictive name or use s

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

What will be better with my services, when i publish my name? Do you know me? What will prevent me to publish fictive name or use someone else to register domain for me? You do not need know me, you only need to know, if my servers abuse you or not. Nothing more, nothing less, exactly as on the st

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Ahoj, Dňa Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:36:23 -0400 Bill Cole via mailop napísal: > On 2021-09-24 at 11:50:24 UTC-0400 (Fri, 24 Sep 2021 17:50:24 +0200) > Slavko via mailop > is rumored to have said: > > > While i cannot comment mentioned OVH domain, i will ask, why anyone > > have to know from WHOIS of

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

I'm not going to dispute that the law is dumb (because it certainly is), but Prof. Goldman misses the mark on the spam filtering issue, I think. If he mentioned new Tex. Bus. & Comm. Code Sec. 321.054(1) ("the provider is authorized to block the transmission under Section 321.114 or other applicab

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Am 24.09.21 um 17:50 schrieb Slavko via mailop: > > While i cannot comment mentioned OVH domain, i will ask, why anyone > have to know from WHOIS of my domain my name, or my address or anything > about me as private person? Yes, if someone has archive of WHOIS > response, it was there and i was not

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 2021-09-24 at 11:50:24 UTC-0400 (Fri, 24 Sep 2021 17:50:24 +0200) Slavko via mailop is rumored to have said: While i cannot comment mentioned OVH domain, i will ask, why anyone have to know from WHOIS of my domain my name, or my address or anything about me as private person? Yes, if someo

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Ahoj, Dňa Fri, 24 Sep 2021 14:45:08 + Steven Champeon via mailop napísal: > Looking up the domain in Google gives you the parent organization, as > well as a link to a French Wikipedia page containing their address, > leadership, history, URL, etc. so the net effect is that GDPR > destroying

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

on Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 11:40:22AM +0200, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote: > This *is* a law that "helps protect the innocent victims". Yes, it is > sometimes poorly (or intentionally wrongly) implemented, such an abusing the > "legitimate interest" concept included in the GDPR by many advertisers t

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

> On Sep 23, 2021, at 9:08 PM, John Levine via mailop wrote: > > It appears that Jarland Donnell via mailop said: >>> * “the provider has a good faith, reasonable belief that the message >>> contains malicious computer code, obscene material, material depicting >>> sexual conduct, or material

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On Fri, 2021-09-24 at 13:36 +0200, Sidsel Jensen via mailop wrote: > Privacy is sometimes a two-edged sword. Privacy is a two-concepts word whose combination is misunderstood by most: Property+Secrecy. Property: the right to exclude others from using what is yours. Secrecy: the effort to hide

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

In my estimation, how would they know that it didn't get to the inbox if you... just don't tell them? Possibly a naive thought, possibly not. *Zach RoseEmail Deliverability Manager* [image: SharpSpring Marketing Automation] Partner Support: 1-888-428-9605, option 1 E

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 9/24/21 13:36, Sidsel Jensen via mailop wrote: > I think you misunderstood what Michael wrote. I think he was refering > to the changes in WHOIS, which makes it harder to find correlating > abusers, since the data is now hidden due to the implementation of > GDPR. Privacy is sometimes a two-edge

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Dnia 24.09.2021 o godz. 13:36:28 Sidsel Jensen via mailop pisze: > > I think you misunderstood what Michael wrote. I think he was refering to > the changes in WHOIS, which makes it harder to find correlating abusers, > since the data is now hidden due to the implementation of GDPR. Privacy > is s

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Hi Jaroslaw I think you misunderstood what Michael wrote. I think he was refering to the changes in WHOIS, which makes it harder to find correlating abusers, since the data is now hidden due to the implementation of GDPR. Privacy is sometimes a two-edged sword. /Sidsel > On 24 Sep 2021, at 11

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Hi, Dňa 24. 9. o 11:40 Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop napísal(a): > This *is* a law that "helps protect the innocent victims". Yes, it is > sometimes poorly (or intentionally wrongly) implemented, such an abusing the > "legitimate interest" concept included in the GDPR by many advertisers to > still flo

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Dnia 23.09.2021 o godz. 20:41:41 Michael Peddemors via mailop pisze: > It's just really sad, that instead of going after malicious > dangerous offenders we keep bringing on new laws to make it harder > to do so. GDPR, anonymous domain registries etc.. Why do you assume that GDPR is a law directed

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 2021-09-23 10:26 p.m., Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote: On 9/23/21 19:45, John Levine via mailop wrote: A bizarre new Texas law makes most spam filtering illegal, effective Dec 2:   “An electronic mail service provider may not intentionally impede the transmission of another person’s electro

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 9/23/21 19:45, John Levine via mailop wrote: A bizarre new Texas law makes most spam filtering illegal, effective Dec 2: “An electronic mail service provider may not intentionally impede the transmission of another person’s electronic mail message based on the content of the message” unle

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 20:41:41 -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote: >Why is there no laws that help protect the innocent victims of all the >phishing attacks that go on unabated from some of the largest companies? In the case of unsolicited broadcast email (UBE, spam) the laws tend to be wr

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 23 Sep 2021 23:42:38 -0400, "John Levine" wrote: >Oh, you can't block them at all. See sec 321.054. > >https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/BC/htm/BC.321.htm#321.054 Which states, unless my monitor deceives me, that the denial must be "based on the content of the message". Since the tota

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

It appears that Michael Rathbun via mailop said: >On 23 Sep 2021 22:45:48 -0400, John Levine via mailop >wrote: > >>* it “provides a process for the prompt, good faith resolution of a dispute >>related to the blocking with the sender of >the commercial electronic mail message” or > >Fortunately,

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

This thread will probably be a rehash of the many conversations had on this topic, but the laws always protect the rights on who you open your door to, and who you decide to let cross the thresh hold... It's just really sad, that instead of going after malicious dangerous offenders we keep bri

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 23 Sep 2021 23:26:12 -0400, John Levine via mailop 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 "inte

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Sure. If everyone operating out of or with customers in Texas disables their spam filters, I'm sure I'll have the time, money, and representation. On 2021-09-23 22:26, John Levine wrote: It appears that Jarland Donnell via mailop said: Also fun to totally read Sec. 321.114: https://statutes.

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

It appears that Jarland Donnell via mailop said: >Also fun to totally read Sec. 321.114: >https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/BC/htm/BC.321.htm#321.114 > >Looks to me like plenty of reasonable ground for operating as usual to >anyone who is operating in good faith to begin with. Do you real

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

On 23 Sep 2021 22:45:48 -0400, John Levine via mailop wrote: >* it “provides a process for the prompt, good faith resolution of a dispute >related to the blocking with the sender of the commercial electronic mail >message” or Fortunately, all of the senders that I publicly announce that I am b

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

Also fun to totally read Sec. 321.114: https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/BC/htm/BC.321.htm#321.114 Looks to me like plenty of reasonable ground for operating as usual to anyone who is operating in good faith to begin with. On 2021-09-23 21:53, Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote: * “the p

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

It appears that Jarland Donnell via mailop said: >> * “the provider has a good faith, reasonable belief that the message >> contains malicious computer code, obscene material, material depicting >> sexual conduct, or material that violates other law” > >And guess what I have on all of my spam filt

Re: [mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

* “the provider has a good faith, reasonable belief that the message contains malicious computer code, obscene material, material depicting sexual conduct, or material that violates other law” And guess what I have on all of my spam filters? Good faith, reasonable evidence and belief that it co

[mailop] Got any users in Texas? Better turn off your spam filters by Dec 2

A bizarre new Texas law makes most spam filtering illegal, effective Dec 2: “An electronic mail service provider may not intentionally impede the transmission of another person’s electronic mail message based on the content of the message” unless: * it “provides a process for the prompt, good