On TV.com: Why Is Everyone in TV High School SO OLD
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 6 of 61:
Next »
« Previous
...then you shouldn't be sending it.
It should be illegal to send mass email to people with whom you have no established relationship. Period.

The reason is that spam costs the recipient money, not the sender. Imagine if the post office forced you to pay for all the paper junk mail which comes through your letterbox...that's what spam is doing. Yes you can easily delete it, but IT'S COSTING YOU MONEY.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?
Posted by: Jomo_z   Posted on: 12/18/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Suspicious basis  S.Howard-Sarin ZDNet Moderator | 12/15/04
That is probably the safest way to do it.  doe_z | 12/15/04
Had to happen  Roger Ramjet | 12/15/04
If you do not know where your email is going  Squawkbox | 12/15/04
"no way for a person sending e-mail to know where the e-mail is going"???  James T. Kirk | 12/15/04
...then you shouldn't be sending it.  Jomo_z | 12/18/04
How does this differ from fax and telemarketing spam?  dvarona | 12/15/04
The stupidity of judges in the Internet Age...  BitTwiddler | 12/15/04
The stupidy of posters in any age.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
I Wholeheartedly agree  Roger Ramjet | 12/16/04
Well, technically,  rapson | 12/16/04
That's a very real possiblity  voska | 12/15/04
Spam is simple  ONEstar | 12/15/04
The Judge is RIGHT  RobertoSalazar | 12/15/04
The judge May be right, but you are WRONG!  Mack DaNife | 12/15/04
I'm Already Paying Enough To That Traitor Bush  itanalyst | 12/15/04
Where in the story does it say anything about the UN?  Squawkbox | 12/15/04
If you can get Junk Mail you can get Junk eMail  Kerensky97 | 12/15/04
Cost is the deciding factor  GregSalts | 12/15/04
Very well said GregSalts....so the solution is...  Stellardyne | 12/15/04
GREAT IDEA!!!  itanalyst | 12/15/04
Here's an enhancement on that, I think.  James T. Kirk | 12/15/04
Current technology yes...shortly after implementation, no...  Stellardyne | 12/15/04
Damn.  James T. Kirk | 12/15/04
One flaw..  Patrick Jones | 12/16/04
Even better solution.  Letophoro | 12/16/04
You're absolutely INCORRECT  d_jedi | 12/15/04
I'm Embarassed To Have Been A Maryland Resident  itanalyst | 12/15/04
The judge can only rule according to the law.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
Not exactly...you are forgetting some things...  Stellardyne | 12/15/04
Obviously your reasons don't change the law.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
Law is very subjective and based to interpetation...  Stellardyne | 12/15/04
Sorry you are 100% dead wrong.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
Not since 7th grade...  Stellardyne | 12/15/04
Hey, Don't Knock No_Ax  itanalyst | 12/15/04
Rant tulr, you lose.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
Rant rule, you lose.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
Rant Rules  SC-man | 12/17/04
No Ax, what state do you live in? I mean besides confusion...  Stellardyne | 12/15/04
Ok, you've used that at least twice today...  BitTwiddler | 12/15/04
Just because you were psnaked with it, don't start crying.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
judges judge, that's it  voska | 12/15/04
Strange as it sounds, I have to agree with No_Ax on this one.  Letophoro | 12/15/04
Even stranger,,,, you're right.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
It'd be nice if the article told us what that law said  Michael Kelly | 12/15/04
The law in breif ...  George Mitchell | 12/15/04
I agree.  d_jedi | 12/15/04
The jurisdiction IS federal folks .. No_Ax is correct  George Mitchell | 12/15/04
If It's Legal For Them To Spam Us....  itanalyst | 12/15/04
This decision says nothing about the legality or illegality of spam  George Mitchell | 12/15/04
So the judge won't mind if we forward all our spam to him, right?  James T. Kirk | 12/15/04
Is anyone sure interstate commerce laws apply here?  James T. Kirk | 12/15/04
Obviously the judge is. I'm betting he knows more law than you.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
Uh... ok  James T. Kirk | 12/15/04
Sorry...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
LOL! (NT)  James T. Kirk | 12/15/04
All I'm saying is that the judge could have done more...  Stellardyne | 12/15/04
NO he can NOT! Judges can NOT ignore the law.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/15/04
This is why we have congress, God help us.  seosamh_z | 12/15/04
Courts Government on Spammer's side  cyberscan | 12/16/04
Anti-spam tools now unconstitutional too?  Sunny Jalolly | 12/16/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement

IT Solutions for 2010

  • Get cost-effective strategies and roadmaps on the most important issues facing IT leaders in 2010! Learn how to easily cut costs and deliver greater efficiency starting with your database, IT compliance management and data center. Visit the IT Leaders Dashboard. Visit the IT Leaders Dashboard.
  • Read about top issues IT decision-makers face every day, plus get cost effective solutions to real life IT problems. Oracle Topline