Re: Anti-SPAM announcement from AT&T Worldnet

[Michael Dillon <michael () memra com>]

On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, Scott Bradner wrote:

> --
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that the
> Electronic Communications Act of 1986 (?) makes it quite illegal to screw
> around with mail that you have accepted for delivery.
> --
>
> spammers bill of rights?  kinda don't think that would have been the 
> aim.

I think that you can comply with the ECPA by simply bouncing back the
email to the sender and only if that is not possible, then drop it in
/dev/null. Since spammers almost always have bogus reply addresses you
shouldn't run into a problem with this even if you are a relay since once
you have failed to bounce back one message, you can then add that source
address to a list that you refuse to accept email from.

If there is a way that spammers can launch a lawsuit against AT&T on the
basis of the ECPA then I am sure they will try so it's best to be
proactive here.


Michael Dillon                   -               Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Software Inc.              -                  Fax: +1-250-546-3049
http://www.memra.com             -               E-mail: michael () memra com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -