nanog mailing list archives
Re: anti-spam vs network abuse
From: Richard Irving <rirving () onecall net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:59:58 -0500
There is NO legal advice in this post. Jack Bates wrote:(SNIPO)
Should we outlaw a potentially beneficial practice due to its abuse by criminals?Okay. What happens if you make a mistake and overload one of my devices costing my company money.
That is usually a civil issue, not criminal. (.edu, .mil and .gov can be exceptions to the rule) [ Older laws protecting the internet, prior to it being public were allowed to linger.... for just that effect....FWIW] And Vixie isn't unique in quoting these California Statutes.... Does anyone have an actual pointer to these things, please ? I realize they don't apply to anywhere but California, but it would make interesting reading...
I guarantee you, the law will look favorably on damages. That is the problem with probing.
See above, that remains a Civil issue, in most cases.
Sometimes the probe itself can be the damage. Programmers are human. Humans make mistakes.
Sometime probes can provide great benefits to all involved, as well. How about the case of the MAPS "test for email relay" function, available to the public ?
Programmers are perfect.
Absolutely NOT True... It is just relative to the rest of the world, we just APPEAR to be perfect. :* :P
-Jack
Current thread:
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse, (continued)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Jack Bates (Feb 27)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse David Schwartz (Feb 27)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Roy (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Paul Vixie (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Daniel Senie (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Gary E. Miller (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Andy Dills (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Dan Hollis (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Jack Bates (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse David G. Andersen (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Charlie Clemmer (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Andy Dills (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Rob Thomas (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Charlie Clemmer (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)