Court takes gag off antispam service

TalkBack 8 of 10:: Next »; « Previous

Thread View
Flat View

Yeah Im Agreeing With You: 'spam law pertains the the senders of an 'email.Can Spam specifies ''email''for a 'sender of an email. It does not detail the relationship (or any kind of relationship) between the sender or receiver of an email.

The power is still within the receipients reason to 'utilize the SpamCop - no matter the relationship of CanSpam to the 'email from an advertiser.(the content of an email isn't the question here). The control of the 'inbox isn't the question either - it is the 'email itself,something of wich the 'recipient is convinced of relationship.

This w/o the adjucent argument of 'problems that might be detailed as is said with the advertisments told of. An email receipient can control the email via utilize that of can-spam (via email) or use control of the 'email 'inbox. Something users have a slight edge on at the present.

______
Yes I understand opt-in,but you have to understand that with 'opt-in the wording within that 'constitutes 'contract between you and the sender. Just because the 'workings of an 'opt-in details 'your choice of doing so (or not doing so),it personafied indemnyfying the sender of an unsolicited email so that it was a 'legal right to send you advertisements. AND something of wich indemnyfied the sender from 'YOUR legal argument of wich to have no relationship in the matter.

For example arguing an 'opt-in while listing all sorts of 'third party representitives (unknown) of wich you would have no control in a future listing.

The same situation of breeding 'inbox email exists for 'opt-out,but there is no such 'contractual indemnity of wich details either the receipient,or sender in any kind of description of relationship. In legal terms through a law that would have made it so.

And both opt-in,and opt-out are used already.But both can rest assured that a response isn't beyond the means of the receipient .

---------
The chicken. I mean how this stuff is,you know that you are expected to pluck all of your poultry as a matter of dinner?!!.(legal rights,that tend to portray mechanics rather than poultry at your notice,or attention of them - think of money could save by not doing so in a business for example.. ).

Dont know what the govy has to this from my post here.Certainly I dont want anything to do with control of ISPs,email, IP addresses THAT I CONTROL FROM MY OWN PERSON. Sure someone could explain it to me 'better - but THATS MY CHICKEN.

.just talking.Chuckles. Thanks for reply.; Posted by: ParadigmOdyssey Posted on: 05/14/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use