[Hidden-tech] Drum Roll Please.... As another spammer walks to the financial guillotine

[Charlie Heath]

Bravo for the courts.

I note that the judge identified specific things that could be easily 
achieved technically with a true identity for email accounts perhaps 
modeled along the lines of DNS or SSL certificates:

    *"The e-mails, which were unsolicited advertisements, did not
    identify the point of origin or the transmission path and did not
    provide a 'readily identifiable' e-mail address to which the
    recipient could send a request for declining further e-mails," *

That tells me there are simple technical changes that can be made, 
rather than rely on courts to arbitrate claims about what is or what 
isn't spam.

As a small developer that needs to send some opt-in email both for 
myself and for clients, I'd much prefer to have a simple technical way 
to reach that end than have to worry about the height of regulatory 
hoops and the countermeasures that the large email services (AOL, 
Comcast, Verizon etc) will put in place to make it difficult for 
legitimate email to get through.

A small problem in the marketplace; SSL and DNS registrations currently 
still have end costs around $7 to $10.  I think secure email identities 
could technically be done essentially free, and commercially ought to be 
achievable for under a buck a year per certified mailbox.  That's 
excluding any costs to get the standard put in place, which is a 
non-trivial detail, given large investments by big players in the 
current structure. And any roll-out would have to be backward 
compatible, so it would take a while before a critical mass of certified 
accounts is achieved.

I'd think, though, that the big service providers could make their 
account identities secure at very low cost (me at comcast.net etc), and 
they would save a lot more by reducing the flow of spam through their 
networks than the new cost for creating email identities.

It would be a little like the failed AOL effort to charge a small tax on 
each email they receive, but instead of charging to receive email , 
providers could pay the small cost of securing the identity of their own 
users - and recoup the savings simply by reducing their network and 
processing power used to fight spam.  So maybe some of the big players 
would even opt in.

Charlie Heath
Town Websites <http://www.townwebsites.com>



Roman Victor wrote:
>    ** Be sure to fill out the survey/skills inventory in the member's area.
>    ** If you did, we all thank you.
>
>
> Greetings:
>
> And now for something totally different: 
>
> Even if our own Mass Atty General won't fight spammers, at least someone
> will.
>
> In recent news not covered by our regular news media on August 5, 2008: A
> Clinton Iowa-based Internet service provider has been awarded a more than
> $236 million federal judgment against an illegal spammer:
>
> http://www.clintonherald.com/archivesearch/local_story_278021410.html
>
> I searched out actual judgment and mounted the judgment on my own web site
> since the URL from the Iowa court web site is so very long it would not
> travel well in any text message:
>
> http://www.rvpmdesigns.com/images/KrammervPerezandBartokIowa.pdf
>
> This type of judgment applies to a lot of the current spammers who think
> they are above the law by using 3rd party "Internet Marketing" firms!
>
> Roman
>  
> Roman Victor, Software Developer
> RVPM Designs
> 8 Coach Ln
> Amherst, MA 01002
> 413 253-6547
> 413 695-9425 cell
> romanvictor at rvpmdesigns.com
> www.rvpmdesigns.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hidden-discuss mailing list - home page: http://www.hidden-tech.net
> Hidden-discuss at lists.hidden-tech.net
>
> You are receiving this because you are on the Hidden-Tech Discussion list.
> If you would like to change your list preferences, Go to the Members   
> page on the Hidden Tech Web site.
> http://www.hidden-tech.net/members
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.hidden-tech.net/pipermail/hidden-discuss/attachments/20081010/7e50d1b2/attachment.html