Re: [OT] Good Anti-Spam Boilerplate

[Charles Sprickman <spork () inch com>]

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004, Charles Sprickman wrote:

> After some senseless Googling, I'm at a loss.  I'm looking for a very
> comprehensive, up-to-date example of an AUP that covers spam.  When I say
> "modern", I mean that I want it to include not just direct spamming, but
> abuse of remote open-relays, abuse of remote trojaned boxes, sending
> through a third party that circumvents the local AUP, etc.  Some good
> definition of "requested email" would be great - ie: double opt-in, or
> single opt-in with some documentation that the user requested the mail on
> a web form or similar.
>
> Some language that covers penalties would also be helpful, such as
> equipment seizure for non-payment of penalties.
>
> Please reply privately and I'll summarize.  I do not wish to get into any
> debates about what qualifies as spam on this list.

Replying to myself here...

Thanks to everyone.  I'd missed the spamhaus "spam definition" which will
be very helpful in wording a few things.  And the prize for "best TOS"
goes to Steve Sobol from "justthe.net".  This one is great:

http://justthe.net/legal/tos/

I especially like the pdf generator. :)

Now I'll have to see what the lawyer thinks.

Thanks again everyone,

Charles

> Thanks,
>
> Charles
>
> --
> Charles Sprickman
> spork () inch com