[24778] in Cypherpunks
Re: San Francisco Editorial
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathaniel Borenstein)
Wed Jan 4 10:03:53 1995
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 09:39:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
In-Reply-To: <17394.789202334.1@nsb.fv.com>
A letter to the editor is like spitting into the wind in this case. I
think what's needed is a more constructive affirmative action, ideally
taking Cantor and Siegel to court somewhere.
I know that there was an FCC ruling in 1993 that has saved me LOADS of
annoyance from telephone sales calls, because now if you get such a call
and you formally request to be taken off their dialing lists, you can
actually SUE them if they call you again. As a result, they now tend to
take you very seriously when you make such a request in a knowledgable
fashion. Does anyone know if there might be a similar legal case to be
made against net spammers who persist after being warned? I suspect
that it's easy to make such a case for email spamming, but probably not
for spamming of umoderated newsgroups.
Note that I speak entirely for myself here, not for my employers. -- Nathaniel
