Re: opt-out registry comments

Paul Blackburn said on Wednesday, August 03, 2011 :
> Something else to perhaps think about...
> What would the phishing/banking fraud mails fall under?
> Are they included as spam?
> A lot of us view it as spam but in more stricter terms it is deemed
> criminal activity.
> However we treat it as "Spam" to include when we update SA/Spam Filter
> rules, etc.
> It also does not stop at Banking... 419 scams, etc.
> There are so many forms of scamming and criminal activity that I'm afraid
> by starting to classify this we are simply widening the grey area.
> Surely the approach should be that any means of attempted communication is
> not allowed unless there is a relationship already in place.
> Perhaps one of the arguments to rather support an Opt-In system?
> 
The problem currently is that people do not understand that the
sending of bulk unsolicited emails is in itself criminal activity.

Even us supposedly 'Internet savvy' people cannot agree that
it is theft/fraud/recognisable-common-law-crime to send spam. 

Once that it is an established fact that it is crime in itself, only then
will it be easy to move forward.

All debate that follows about costs, registries etc. will make a lot more 
sense.

You cannot build a house on a bad foundation.

And legislation like the ECT Act that legalise the rape of consumers
exists because of evil people like some of the members of the 
Direct Marketing Association supporting same and stupid (or immoral,
criminal, unethical - pick your poison) people at Universities 
like the UCT.
Oh, and my defense for any libel charges levelled against me will of 
course be the truth...


_______________________________________________
IOZ mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.internet.org.za/mailman/listinfo/ioz