From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri May 2 02:30:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA22389 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 2 May 1997 02:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [194.198.43.36]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA22384 for ; Fri, 2 May 1997 02:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA28562; Fri, 2 May 1997 11:29:40 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 11:29:40 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199705020929.LAA28562@bitbox.follo.net> From: Eivind Eklund To: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" CC: gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, FreeBSD-Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: "Jeffrey J. Mountin"'s message of Fri, 02 May 1997 01:30:28 -0500 Subject: Re: SPAM target References: <3.0.32.19970502013027.00b8f104@mixcom.com> Reply-to: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >well.. I think we should call the FBI.. it's a national matter as > >he has crossed state lines... as he's spamming our "fax machines" > >across the country (and world wide)... > > Some dweeb threatened me with: > > By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer > meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b) > (1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to > such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual monetary > loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for EACH violation. > > For a customer's news posting?! Right and you read the subject and *still* > read the message. FO. You're missing the point. The point is that the _customer advertised to is paying the bulk of the cost for the advertising_. That's why fax-advertising was prohibited, too - you could just look at the headline and throw it away, but _you_ were paying for it anyway. I'd have liked a class-action suit - I'm getting terribly tired of spam... Reply-to: set to -chat. Eivind.