On Fri, 10 Feb 1995 13:23:20 EST, Mike Ramundo wrote:
>>no laws broken ....
>
>I realize I'm not the best informed, but doesn't the deliberate
>inclusion of the 'Approved' header indicate < whatever the exact
>equivalent of counterfeit/misrepresentation/? >
>
>i.e.  they made a statement and claimed it had YOUR <list-owner>
>approval - it seems that is an open & shut indication of attempt
>to defraud or whatever the proper definition would be - not a
>major point, but an easy conviction on a minor point might make
>the next step easier ... ?
 
If not fraud, how about invasion of privacy?  The whole point of moderator
approval is to reject ALL inappropriate traffic, not just spams.  Isn't
that an implied privacy issue?
 
It seems to me that we HAVE reached a point that requires legislative
action (at least for lists, newgroups, and hosts in the U.S.) comparable to
that already enacted covering automated telemarketing and junk fax.  I've
written my own Congressional representative.  I encourage everyone else to
do likewise (enough mail to enough congressional offices is likely to have
some effect).
 
/s Murphy A. Sewall <[log in to unmask]> (203) 486-2489 voice
   Professor of Marketing                          (203) 486-5246 fax