Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SPAM (an address to rid yourself of it)
FoxNews | Congressonal Bill

Posted on 12/09/2003 6:03:38 AM PST by FlyLow

This morning E.D. Hill, on Fox & Friends, displayed an eMail address for ridding yourself of eMail.

uce@ftc.gov

You are supposed to be able to FORWARD all "spam" to this address (with headers) and they are going to shut them down. This is part of the Anti-Spam bill passed yeaterday and to be signed by President Bush this week.

I have started forwarding this morning and it seems to go through so far.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: spam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last
To: CSM
The first step to liberalism. Government legislation to ensure that we "feel good". It's for the children, don't ya know!

Yeah, I'm worried about myself. I think I can limit myself to just one "feel good" thing--the Do Not Call registry. I'm pretty sure I can stop there....

41 posted on 12/09/2003 7:08:55 AM PST by cantfindagoodscreenname (SAVE THE BLACK FLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: steplock
Does that satisfy you NNANY-STATE beggars?

That is a gross simplification of a serious issue. Under your scenario our options are to bend over and take it or to kill them. I will settle for the "NANNY-STATE" option.

42 posted on 12/09/2003 7:10:16 AM PST by ghostrider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Dallas59
I don't want the Gov associating my name with this crap.

They all get it too :)

43 posted on 12/09/2003 7:12:30 AM PST by Nick Danger (With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
The "CAN-SPAM" bill won't work, AND takes away any right of private action previously authorized by State Laws.

Effective next year. . .spam is legal.
44 posted on 12/09/2003 7:21:25 AM PST by Salgak (don't mind me: the orbital mind control lasers are making me write this. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cantfindagoodscreenname
Hey, the first step to self curing the problem is admitting that you have a problem. On to step #2....;-)
45 posted on 12/09/2003 7:22:50 AM PST by CSM (Stop the MF today!!! (Flurry, 11/06/2003))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: cantfindagoodscreenname
apologies if I offended.
I'm told that the only way a fellow gets these solicitations is by leaving cookies at porn sites.
46 posted on 12/09/2003 7:31:30 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ghostrider
I don't know ... the "string 'em up option sounds intriguing!

Let's trot back down memory lane - this will work with those in their mid 40's & older,

Remember the days if someone insulted your wife, your flag, your country, you took it out back and made sure the insulter learned the errors of his ways. It was easy & simple. Of course if he was bigger, (meaner) you lost that particular argument that time but respect was gained usually.

Also, if a person was WRONG, other DECENT people would also let that person know that he was wrong.

There was NO NEED to go to the NANNY STATE Storm-Troopers so they could "Take Down" an obnoxious boor.

Someone burned a flag in your presence, you showed him your feelings towards his attitutdes. You used to NOT crawl to a LAWYER politician and beg for the govt to MAKE A LAW. But you did - and they did - and now ALL will BOW TO THEIR FLAG. But guess what - it is no longer the flag of the U.S.A. but the flag of the U.S.S.A.

Is that what you want?

MAKE A LAW to FORCE people to say GOD! Gee ... isn't that what the Taliban did?

It's time to take down the federal beurocracy and bring back our own individual CIVIL RIGHTS as guaranteed in our CONSTITUTION and original Bill of Rights!
47 posted on 12/09/2003 7:36:15 AM PST by steplock (www.FOCUS.GOHOTSPRINGS.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
Wow great. I've been forwarding this crap to the FBI for who knows how long... and you can guess how effective they have been with the info.

I send mine to SpamCop to parse the headers automatically and compose complaint reports to the abuse desks at any and all ISP's used by the spammer, including the owners of any open relays he might have used to inject spam.

A copy goes to the FTC, who was cited in another story/thread as being one of the studying agencies on this issue. I don't send cc. to the FBI as it isn't their area. Chain letters and Nigerian 419 letters go to the Secret Service's Financial Crimes Division.

The problem with Billy Tauzin's bill is that it redefines spam deliberately, to wash the "mainsleaze" spammers who are waiting in the wings. The bill beats up the small-time chickenboners who are responsible for most of the abusive spam, but the bill does enormous damage to our rights not to have to look at unsolicited commercial e-mails, by redefining it as a legal and permissible form of transmission.

Anything that is sent as commercial advertising without your specific consent is SPAM. And anyone who spams, is abusing the Net and stealing your bandwidth, your computer's resources, and your ISP's server time.

Tauzin rewrote the definition of spam, to exclude commercial advertising sent to you by senders who identify themselves. All they have to do is put their own name on it -- and voila'! Tauzin washes them clean. IMHO this was the ulterior -- and venal -- actual purpose of the bill.

The "do-not-disturb" provision is chickenfeed for chumps. It's called listwashing by spamfighters, and it's something spammers do themselves, in order to avoid getting caught in spamtraps set by spamfighters, who then submit the spammers' ISP's to the blocklist operators like SPEWS and SpamCop.

The other effect of Tauzin's bill is that blocklist operators in the US will no longer be able legally to maintain a blocklist of US spammers who play by Tauzin's rules.

I'm telling you, guys -- this is a typical piece of captive, venal, special-interest legislation on behalf of the bad guys!

As if you couldn't tell just by seeing who wrote it, and noticing that it's a congressman from Louisiana, home of the Louisiana Hayride and many other fine, venal, for-sale scandals and congressmen.

48 posted on 12/09/2003 9:42:20 AM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
They ain't as smart as they think they is. I have a filter on my email that looks for things like "click here to remove" (including the very things required by law) and marks them as spam, which is then easily discarded... and it all gets sent to the FTC, 'legal' spam or not.
49 posted on 12/09/2003 9:47:40 AM PST by thoughtomator (The U.N. is a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
apologies if I offended.

Don't worry. I am a prude, but I can take a joke, lol.

I'm told that the only way a fellow gets these solicitations is by leaving cookies at porn sites.

The only time I go to porn sites is when it's an accident. I don't know how it happens, but I've found myself at those sites and freaked out, lol. I remember getting to one once by incorrectly typing in the URL for the Drudge Report.

In any case, I'd love to be free of these e-mails because I have a bunch of kids whom I don't want exposed to this stuff.

Candi

50 posted on 12/09/2003 10:29:17 AM PST by cantfindagoodscreenname (SAVE THE BLACK FLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: cantfindagoodscreenname
Funny, I never get those.
I get those e-mails and I don't even HAVE one!

Candi


Keep watching...someone will offer to make you one! (-:
51 posted on 12/09/2003 10:51:14 AM PST by FlyLow (What good does it do you to "win" a debate in an insane asylum?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: steplock
There was NO NEED to go to the NANNY STATE Storm-Troopers so they could "Take Down" an obnoxious boor.

Indeed, I'd like to see a law that would make evidence of a crime victim's spamming behaviors (if any) admissible in court. Would work especially well if judges were courageous enough to let jurors know that they get to decide not only the facts of the case but also what is just (Mr. Smith accused of harassing Mr. Jones, but Mr. Jones sent out 10,000,000 emails? Jury finds Mr. Smith not guilty and thanks him for his public service). How long do you think spam would last in that environment?

52 posted on 12/13/2003 9:24:31 PM PST by supercat (Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
They ain't as smart as they think they is. I have a filter on my email that looks for things like "click here to remove" (including the very things required by law) and marks them as spam, which is then easily discarded... and it all gets sent to the FTC, 'legal' spam or not.

Unfortunately, my ISP mis-tags a few things as spam using such criteria. Besides, half the "click to remove" things are really "click to show the spammer this is a real email address".

53 posted on 12/13/2003 9:27:16 PM PST by supercat (Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson