From owner-freebsd-isp Wed Jun 2 23:30:28 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from noop.colo.erols.net (noop.colo.erols.net [207.96.1.150]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A28A1150BD for ; Wed, 2 Jun 1999 23:30:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gjp@noop.colo.erols.net) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=noop.colo.erols.net) by noop.colo.erols.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 10pR1G-0008U5-00; Thu, 3 Jun 1999 02:30:26 -0400 To: Leif Neland , =?X-UNKNOWN?Q?Ronald_Wiplinger_=28=C3Q=A4=AF=AF=C7=29?= , Todd Backman , jahanur , freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Gary Palmer" Subject: Re: How to limit bulk mails. In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 03 Jun 1999 02:26:11 EDT." <32560.928391171@noop.colo.erols.net> Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 02:30:26 -0400 Message-ID: <32616.928391426@noop.colo.erols.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Guess I should have made it clear that this applies to the United States. "Gary Palmer" wrote in message ID <32560.928391171@noop.colo.erols.net>: > You apparently have to be careful with this sort of thing. ISPs cannot > impose punitive damages, as they are not a court of law. If you charge > them a dollar fee for spamming from your dialops, you have to be > willing to prove (in a court of law) that the `fine' is infact a > justifiable recovery of costs (*NOT* including damages) from the users > actions (i.e. hiring abuse staff, paper trail, etc). > I'm not a lawyer, so I could be wrong, but thats what our local abuse > types say... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message