TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech

Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech

Scott Dorsey (
23 Nov 2004 13:23:14 -0500

Barry Margolin <> wrote:

> Where does it say that this is the reason why's mail is
> being blocked? One of the other problems that the white paper
> mentioned is mailers that assume that any bulk email is spam -- but
> legitimate mailing lists will necessarily send out bulk email.

It doesn't. In fact,'s mail is blocked because they
persist in sending huge amounts of mail out to people who never
requested it.

It's true that they are downstream of, and it's true that a
lot of folks do block because they cater to so many
spammers. So you can well imagine collateral damage resulting to
legitimate customers of It's possible that it would have
been the case if was a legitimate customer, but they
aren't. They are spammers, and therefore they get treated like

The collateral damage issue is a serious one, but it's about the only
way to get large ISPs to take the spam problem seriously. What is
currently happening in Korea is a fine example of what happens when
largescale blocking of spamming ISPs does not occur.

> What bugs me is EFF's use of the phrase "free speech" to make this
> sound like a 1st Amendment issue. The 1st Amendment only limits the
> *government's* ability to curtail free speech. It doesn't require
> organizations to facilitate any particular communications.

And it certainly doesn't require ME to use MY resources to facilitate
someone else's communications.


"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Thomas A. Horsley: "Re: The Persuaders"
Go to Previous message: Gary Breuckman: "Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads?"
May be in reply to: Monty Solomon: "EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page