<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] China Rewards Porn Snitches
- To: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ga] China Rewards Porn Snitches
- From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:09:20 -0700
- Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
- References: <20041012162446.38664.qmail@web52902.mail.yahoo.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Eric and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,
ISP's are less interested in self regulation as competition is so
fierce. Yet ISP's can be ONE place where reducing spam can be
achieved to a degree and many are providing their users to address
this via a blocking list.
However Registries and Registrars have a much more direct and
effective means by which eventually eliminating spam can be achieved.
That being that their registrants of domain names can be "turned off"
from using their domain names for any purpose if persistence in them
being associated with spam. In that a significant amount of spam
comes from Email addresses associated to third level domains having
the Registrar and Registry "turning off" or confiscating those 2nd
level domain names will go much further to dealing with spam than
ISP's can ever be reasonably considered to achieve..
China's move to offer rewards of $240.00 for ratting out spammers,
where ever they may find them, is a good step as well but can also be
gamed so as to demonize others that are not guilty of spamming. Hence
reliance on this method can rapidly become very problemsom and lead
to ecommerce trade disputes that governments are likely not prepared
to adequately address...
Hugh Dierker wrote:
> It would seem that the ISPs would be in the best position to self
> regulate. However I would be interested to learn how a registrar
> facilitates spamming. Of course I am excluding the obvious of farming
> data bases. But that is only a source of info not the act of spamming.
>
>
> Eric
>
> Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
> stakeholders/users,
>
> Interesting response you gave here... It seems that governments and
> courts and prosecutors aren't doing enough as the increase in spam in
> growing exponentially.
> Hence my consideration in my remarks below... We need to fight spam
> wherever
> we find it or it finds us... So lets take a *Bite* out of Spam! >;<
> Let us all
> try to encourage ICANN and its registries and registrars to clean up
> the
> mess
> they have created, Spam-wise...
>
> Hugh Dierker wrote:
>
> > It would seem that governments and courts and prosecutors are doing
> > a fine job.
> > Assessing penalties and fines and jailtime seems a bit outside the
> > perview or even the broadest assessment of ICANN duties.
> > However they should do more to establish industry standards and
> > community consensus on the issue. Note this is not an engineering
> > problem.
> > Eric
> >
> > Jeff Williams wrote:
> > All former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,
> >
> > I wonder how ICANN Registries and Registrars as well as the ICANN
> > BoD are going to address this growing problem if they at all step up
>
> > to he plate at all.
> > See:
> > http
> >
> //www.newsday.com/technology/business/wire/sns-ap-china-porn-rewards,0,1812553.story?coll=sns-ap-technology-headlines
>
> >
> > I am contemplating recommending with to our members in china
> > to rat some of these domain name holders and their respective
> > Registrars and Registries with examples in especially the .BIZ
> > and .INFO to the USTR as an official complaint. I am sure
> > Ambasador Zollick will become interested in time...
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders
> strong!)
> >
> > "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
> > Pierre Abelard
> >
> > "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> > liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> > P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> > United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> > ===============================================================
> > Updated 1/26/04
> > CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Registered Email addr with the USPS
> > Contact Number: 214-244-4827
> >
> >
> >
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
>
> "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
> Pierre Abelard
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Registered Email addr with the USPS
> Contact Number: 214-244-4827
>
>
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|