Author: Graeme Fowler Date: To: exim-users Subject: Re: [exim] Laying out a spamtrap
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 11:35 +0100, Phil (Medway Hosting) wrote: > The law is an ass. The "definition of spam" has absolutely nothing to do
> with that.
>
> "It's consent - not content".
>
> The content or purpose of the mail has no bearing on it at all.
I'm sure if you speak to Steve Linford of Spamhaus, and the bloke from
e360 Insight, you'd get two more differing opinions of what spam is and
isn't. And if you speak to the different US circuit court judges
involved in their ongoing case and appeal, you'll get differing opinions
again.
Whether or not the law is half horse, half donkey (which is
controversial in itself) is irrelevant - the regulations stated by Ian
are the only *statutory* definition available to people in the UK. There
are, as examples show, many other definitions - you are free to make
your own choice.
[Wearing list moderator's hat]
What this has to do with Exim, specifically, I'm failing to see. If you
want to argue the toss over the definition of spam, SPAM-L is over there
->
