From owner-freebsd-isp Mon Jun 16 08:28:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA11160 for isp-outgoing; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 08:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns2.harborcom.net (root@ns2.harborcom.net [206.158.4.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA11030 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 08:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (bradley@localhost) by ns2.harborcom.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA01743; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 11:25:21 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 11:25:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Bradley Dunn X-Sender: bradley@ns2.harborcom.net To: Eddie Fry cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: spam mail In-Reply-To: <33A35515.402B@eaznet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk This is referring to the so-called junk-fax law. You can read it online at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.shtml AFAIK, a court has never established that this can be applied to e-mail. Some theorize that it can be applied since computers are capable of performing the functions of a fax machine. IMHO a court would not side with that interpretation. Many people are proposing to amend that law to specifically address SPAM, though. Check out http://www.cauce.org pbd -- You can make it illegal, but you can't make it unpopular. On Sat, 14 Jun 1997, Eddie Fry wrote: > I just saw a .signature on the internet that may be usefull in stopping > spam mail. Here it is. Do you think this would stand up in small > claims court??? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, Sec. 227, > any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is > subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. > E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. > ------------------------------------------------------------------