On BNET: Online porn struggles for profits
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 22 of 42:
Next »
« Previous
Something's wrong - I'm understanding you
I don't agree, though.

Yes, if business e-mail communications are regulated to prevent nuisance e-mail, then the rules have to apply to businesses who got your e-mail legitimately - businesses with which you have a relationship.

However, a Do-not-spam list would have to be overridden, trumped, by a business communication relationship which you actually want. If I have to make a public announcement in order not to receive corporate e-mail about the size and normal function of my pudenda, then something's already wrong with the world - Do-not-spam isn't the answer, although it's a better answer than CAN-SPAM - but if I can't receive news from Microsoft or my anti-virus provider without taking my name /off/ the Don't-talk-about-my-body-parts list first, that's just stupid. The Do-not-spam list, if we have to have one, should mean, "Do not send me any e-mails for a commercial purpose unless you can demonstrate that I have given permission and requested that you do this." It should not mean, "I have e-mail but I don't use it for anything that ever matters."
Posted by: Robert Carnegie   Posted on: 12/22/03 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

But how do you stop "lawful" Spam  el1jones | 12/17/03
Even worse...  RestonTechAlec | 12/18/03
Get a mass email program to do mass-opt-out  hadaso | 01/08/04
That's why OPT-IN is the only reasonable solution  shawkins | 12/22/03
or a federal opt out plan like with telco's  JWatson77 | 12/28/03
Boy, I wish I had an assistant to do that...  Albee_Freeoneday | 01/08/04
Another Thought  Doug@... | 12/17/03
We want opt-in, and the right to personally prosecute!  rbrucecarter | 12/17/03
Hurts more than it Helps  issthatso | 12/17/03
More realistically....  DarbyOhara | 12/17/03
What ISPs can do  RestonTechAlec | 12/18/03
The real answer!  ShadeTree | 12/17/03
Unfortunately  James T. Kirk | 12/17/03
Burden of proof  Robert Carnegie | 12/17/03
This bill is nothing but a farce ...  worknman | 12/17/03
Do Not Solicit  ParadigmOdyssey | 12/17/03
I do not understand what you wrote  Robert Carnegie | 12/18/03
(NT) Nobody does. Just let it go.  James T. Kirk | 12/18/03
Maybe  ParadigmOdyssey | 12/18/03
Almost cut and paste  rpmyers1 | 12/19/03
yeah I get that  ParadigmOdyssey | 12/19/03
Something's wrong - I'm understanding you  Robert Carnegie | 12/22/03
The bigger  ParadigmOdyssey | 12/22/03
By the way  ParadigmOdyssey | 12/19/03
Is there anything in this bill to prevent the optout list  Taz_z | 12/17/03
This is why we need new representation  Lonewolf_z | 12/17/03
What ever happened to "Opt IN"  Sick Of It | 12/17/03
I do not understand what you wrote  Robert Carnegie | 12/18/03
Congress is no help: they sold out to the DMA!  jdoe512 | 12/18/03
Can Spam Act  mcwebber | 12/22/03
Spammer anti-defamation league, line #1  rpmyers1 | 12/22/03
I would like to press charges  JWatson77 | 12/28/03
lets create a bunch of CAN laws  JWatson77 | 12/28/03
It must go further  cmh510@... | 01/03/04
Focus is wrong: Dry up the cash flow, instead  escoles@... | 01/05/04
spam  deanp60@... | 01/08/04
can spam bill is political scam  ironfist03 | 01/08/04
Everyone should respond to all spam offers!  hapticz | 01/08/04
let's can ignorant politicians!  awilson_z | 01/08/04
How to report spam to the sender's ISP - no technical abilities needed!  hadaso | 01/08/04
How to report spam to the sender's ISP - no technical abilities needed!  hadaso | 01/08/04
Stopping Spam  chris@... | 01/08/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here