nanog mailing list archives
Re: AOL holes again.
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon () eiv com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:42:24 -0500
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:36:10PM -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
Then presumably rejecting the connection with a '571 eat my spamfilter' outright is legal.
That's how I read it. But I damn sure don't want to get into a discussion about this law here; that'd send Susan over the edge. :-) It's old news, passed in 1986, talk to your lawyer. Or email me in private for those few details I can give about the one time somebody went up against me on this law.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: AOL holes again., (continued)
- Re: AOL holes again. M. David Leonard (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Steve Sobol (Mar 20)
- Re: AOL holes again. Shawn McMahon (Mar 20)
- RE: AOL holes again. Richard Welty (Mar 20)
- RE: AOL holes again. Roeland Meyer (Mar 20)
- RE: AOL holes again. M. David Leonard (Mar 20)
- 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. M. David Leonard (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)