Message-ID: <01HR5FWQB5CI0P0RTN@ACFcluster.NYU.EDU> Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 11:18:47 -0500 From: mailto:COLGATEM@ACFCLUSTER.NYU.EDU> Subject: JUNK-netting and Lifestyle Health SPAM To: Multiple recipients of list DEVEL-L
You have been quoted on the internet as stating "The people at Lifestyle Health aren't to blame for anything other than ignorance." YOu suggest the "blame" be put on " CyberSell" which is "run by Laurence Canter and Martha Siegel." But you state that Lifestyle got the "shell account"IF these are your comments-- I find them ethically questionable and legally inacceptable.
After all, Lifestyle Health hired Cybersell, according to this report.
If this cavalier attitude by profit-driven companies-- that it doesn't matter what havoc they wreck on the net, what costs they impose on other people in time and money--is the going attitude, then obviously there will be no recourse but to BAN all commercial-driven traffic on the net through legal means, or to impose automatic restrictions by the usage of "screening software" .
There are many possibilities of countering such traffic-- making the access provider financially responsible for incurred charges; instituting a "return to sender" scheme, or whatever.
Undoubtedly developers are working on such possibilities at this very minute. Perhaps a whole new field of software development is opening up.
In the meantime, it seems companies are unaware of the negative backlash their tactics are causing, and it also seems they will be slow to find out any effect on decreased business.
It remains to be seen whether hackers are up to the challenge of countering junk-netting.
Marlene Colgate