nanog mailing list archives
Re: AOL holes again.
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon () eiv com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 20:58:45 -0500
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 07:23:18PM -0600, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
the service delivery, and given how much load spam places on ISPs rejecting it is permissible as protecting the property of the service provider.
Since I get less spam in a normal day than I do regular mail, and I get a lot more spam (and a lot more regular mail) than the average person, I wouldn't want to try to fight from that position in court. "But your honor, 5% of his email was spam, we had to kill that in order to provide the service." "But you were killing all his legitimate mail traffic from the 2nd-largest ISP in the country." "We had to, he got three spams from them last week." Rings kinda hollow. It gets worse if you killed what you thought was spam, and it was SOLICITED commercial email he signed up for. I get quite a bit of that.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: AOL holes again., (continued)
- Re: AOL holes again. Shawn McMahon (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Shawn McMahon (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Dan Hollis (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Shawn McMahon (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Alan Clegg (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. James M. Shuler III (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Wayne (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Shawn McMahon (Mar 20)
- RE: AOL holes again. David Schwartz (Mar 21)
- RE: AOL holes again. Dan Hollis (Mar 21)
- Re: AOL holes again. Matt Levine (Mar 21)
- Re: AOL holes again. Shawn McMahon (Mar 21)
- Re: AOL holes again. Shawn McMahon (Mar 21)
- Re: AOL holes again. Steve Sobol (Mar 21)