Subject: Re: Spam

From: Albert Lunde <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 19:54:45 -0500

>To put out a draft ignoring the basic arguments around the whole spam
>issue would be, IMHO, at best misguided.  There should be a serious
>rethinking of the guidelines of the draft document.  All due attention
>drawn to the fact that whatever document is produced, it reflect ongoing
>thinking in such a way as to pave the way to well defined platform from
>which all actors could draw, and to which all could refer, while at the
>same time protecting the interests of freedom both on and off line.

We _already_ put out a RFC saying "SPAM is bad". See RFC: 2635
ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2635.txt

That RFC  is an "Informational RFC". As the preface says: "It does not
specify an Internet standard of any kind."

This draft is supposed to be about non-SPAM ways to do business on
the Internet: a as companion to that document. It too is tracked to
become an "Informational RFC".

(As far as I know, that's the only kind of RFC the User Services Area
has produced.)

I don't think it should be turned in to an omnibus about all other
possible law and policy implications for Internet business, and I
don't think we have cause to stop saying "SPAM is bad".

Other comments:

>Businesses or individuals ressorting to SPAM perceive a useful and
>profitable business model.

Theft and fraud are also potentially profitable, but they aren't ethical.

>Another problem that must be adressed is that of restricted lists.  How
>will the merchant know if his targetted customer refuses online
>advertising

The correct assumption is that _all_ addresses should not receive
unsolicited e-mail unless one has an affirmative statement otherwise.

There's really no ethical way to harvest e-mail addresses in bulk,
and thus no good way to build lists of "targetted customers" without
using opt-in methods.

Note that unsolicited e-mail is not the only possible form of "online
advertising".

>One answer is subscription to restricted list information.
>Can [email-masked] be contacted ?  Here, all steps must be taken to ensure easy
>and cheap, almost public service access to such lists, to avoid situation=
>s
>where only medium to large corporations would be economically able to pay
>an annual consultation fee, leaving the "little man" with the choice of
>paying an excessive subscription fee or risk the consequences.

Even if one restricts attention to e-mail, there are thousands of
successful _opt-in_ e-mail lists, already on the Internet, many
started by a "little man".

Opt-in scales up and down very sucessfully. So there's really no
unsurmountable economic barriers to _its_ use.

---
     Albert Lunde                      [email-masked]