From owner-nanog@merit.edu Thu Aug 19 12:43:05 2004 Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:39:43 -0700 From: Lou Katz <lou@metron.com> To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: OT - 3 Free Gmail invites
On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 10:13:29PM -0700, Jonathan Nichols wrote:
Joshua Brady wrote:
I've got 2 Gmail invites up for grabs for the first 2 to email me offlist.
You know, I'm having trouble finding people that *don't* have gmail.com accounts already. :P
Because G-mail scans INCOMING mail without the sender's consent, we will NEVER have a G-mail account and have considered blocking them.
Are you seriously considering blocking _everybody's_ mail? In today's world practically *everybody* scans incoming mail. Spam, viruses, scams, bogus bounce messages, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
have a G-mail account and have considered blocking them. We actively discourage our clients from using this service.
Do you similarly discourage the use of ATT WorldNet, MSN, Yahoo, Earthlink, Hotmail, AOL, Earthlink, Panix, Flashnet, Netscape.net, RCN, Corecomm, Comcast, Cogent, RoadRunner, Cox, Adelphia, etc. ? *EVERY*ONE* of those providers also scans all INCOMING mail. *Without* the sender's consent. Do you do any anti-spam and/or anti-virus scanning of *your* incoming mail? Why does it seem like the description 'two-faced' applies to your attitude?
If you want to let a service scan YOUR mail, it is your perogative, but you cannot give them permission to scan MY mail to you.
And, just BTW, legally, _yes_ I *can* give a third-party permission to scan any/all of my incoming mail, including yours. And you, the sender, do =not= have anything to say about the matter. LEGAL FACT: I can hire _anybody_ to read my mail, on my behalf, 'annotate' it for me, and provide me with the 'marked up' copy, *without* violating any of your 'intellectual property rights' (e.g., "copyright"). You have absolutely no say in the matter, whatsoever. And it doesn't matter whether the 'mail' in question is postal mail, or 'e-mail'. The law is _exactly_ the same. *ANYTHING* that _I_ can legally do with/to my incoming mail, I can hire an 'agent' (someone acting 'at my direction', and 'on my behalf') to do. Now, if that person I hired were to give copies of my incoming mail to _someone_else_ (other than myself), *then*and*only*then* would you have a cause for action against "someone". If that person distributed those copies _at_my_direction_, they would be immune; your 'cause for action' would be against _me_. OTOH, if they did it *without* my permission, then and =only= then, would you have cause for action against _them_. Of course, if _I_ were to do that self-same thing -- give copies of incoming mail to 'someone else', then *I* would be liable to the sender for those acts.
I believe Lou here is scanning customers email accounts to block them from GMail usage: www.metron.com does that not defeat his whole purpose to prove a point here? Time to blacklist metron they seem to be scanning users emails without there prior consent! Josh On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:18:07 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com> wrote:
From owner-nanog@merit.edu Thu Aug 19 12:43:05 2004 Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:39:43 -0700 From: Lou Katz <lou@metron.com> To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: OT - 3 Free Gmail invites
On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 10:13:29PM -0700, Jonathan Nichols wrote:
Joshua Brady wrote:
I've got 2 Gmail invites up for grabs for the first 2 to email me offlist.
You know, I'm having trouble finding people that *don't* have gmail.com accounts already. :P
Because G-mail scans INCOMING mail without the sender's consent, we will NEVER have a G-mail account and have considered blocking them.
Are you seriously considering blocking _everybody's_ mail? In today's world practically *everybody* scans incoming mail. Spam, viruses, scams, bogus bounce messages, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
have a G-mail account and have considered blocking them. We actively discourage our clients from using this service.
Do you similarly discourage the use of ATT WorldNet, MSN, Yahoo, Earthlink, Hotmail, AOL, Earthlink, Panix, Flashnet, Netscape.net, RCN, Corecomm, Comcast, Cogent, RoadRunner, Cox, Adelphia, etc. ? *EVERY*ONE* of those providers also scans all INCOMING mail. *Without* the sender's consent.
Do you do any anti-spam and/or anti-virus scanning of *your* incoming mail?
Why does it seem like the description 'two-faced' applies to your attitude?
If you want to let a service scan YOUR mail, it is your perogative, but you cannot give them permission to scan MY mail to you.
And, just BTW, legally, _yes_ I *can* give a third-party permission to scan any/all of my incoming mail, including yours. And you, the sender, do =not= have anything to say about the matter.
LEGAL FACT: I can hire _anybody_ to read my mail, on my behalf, 'annotate' it for me, and provide me with the 'marked up' copy, *without* violating any of your 'intellectual property rights' (e.g., "copyright"). You have absolutely no say in the matter, whatsoever. And it doesn't matter whether the 'mail' in question is postal mail, or 'e-mail'. The law is _exactly_ the same.
*ANYTHING* that _I_ can legally do with/to my incoming mail, I can hire an 'agent' (someone acting 'at my direction', and 'on my behalf') to do.
Now, if that person I hired were to give copies of my incoming mail to _someone_else_ (other than myself), *then*and*only*then* would you have a cause for action against "someone". If that person distributed those copies _at_my_direction_, they would be immune; your 'cause for action' would be against _me_. OTOH, if they did it *without* my permission, then and =only= then, would you have cause for action against _them_.
Of course, if _I_ were to do that self-same thing -- give copies of incoming mail to 'someone else', then *I* would be liable to the sender for those acts.
participants (2)
-
Joshua Brady -
Robert Bonomi