On 2/6/18 2:47 PM, Anne P. Mitchell Esq. wrote:
I know the definition of spam is very subjective and dependent on your
particular the mail flow along with the expectations of the recipients.
Back when I was in-house counsel at MAPS, Paul (Vixie) and I came up with this
definition of spam:
“An electronic message is “spam” IF: (1) the recipient’s personal identity and
context are
irrelevant because the message is equally applicable to many other potential
recipients;
AND (2) the recipient has not verifiably granted deliberate, explicit, and
still-revocable
permission for it to be sent; AND (3) the transmission and reception of the
message
appears to the recipient to give a disproportionate benefit to the sender.”
I think that it still holds up.
Not bad at all. Actually, quite good!
(Of course, the old definition of pornography also holds: "I know it
when I see it." :-)
Miles Fidelman
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
