[clug] [For Sale] Novell / IBM 1-day Linux Technical Workshop

Kim Holburn kim.holburn at anu.edu.au
Sat Jun 26 11:47:37 GMT 2004

On 2004 Jun 26, , at 9:10 PM, Ambrose Andrews wrote:

> Hmm..   in the presence of number 2, the equivalent of number 3 in the 
> context of a mailing list is expelling a user who persists in breaking 
> the rules of the list.

??? Did I miss something?

>  -AA.
> Tomasz Ciolek wrote:
>> Ok...
>> Since there seems to be interest in this....
>> There are three requirements for an Electronic Commercial Message
>> within Australia. These are:
>> 1. Conscent
>> 2. Clear indentification of the sender
>> 3. Functional unsubscribe facility.
>> This message lacks No 3. Thus is in breach of the act.
>> Having said that, should anyone choose to complain to the agency
>> responsible for encforcing the Spam Act, they would have to 
>> investigate
>> (thats required by law) and they would probaly find that there is
>> technical breach of the law.
>> Thus there may be nast consequences.
>> So since you asked, here is the letter of the law.

I was told about some of the implications of this law recently and it 
became suddenly clear to me why the law should stay out of technical 
problems.  This bill is going to make it much more difficult for 
companies/organisations to email people.  It potentially creates 
problems for any mailing lists.

Look spam, real spam these days, has fake headers.  Any email with a 
real return address has a "Functional unsubscribe facility".  
Technically 2. implies 3.

Mikal's reference: 
makes it clear that you can turn off all commercial messages using the 
mailman options:


Do it now anyone who doesn't want to get them.

So this list supplies it's own "Functional unsubscribe facility" as 
well, for those who make use of it, and Chris did make use of it.

Personally these days I have the opposite problem with spam.  Most 
commercial emails I get, even ones I want, get marked as spam and I 
often don't see them until days later.


Disclaimer: IANAL

>> Tomasz Ciolek
>> On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 08:34:36PM +1000, Ambrose Andrews wrote:
>>> Hmm... consent could be implied by the established requirement to 
>>> have [For Sale].
>>> I'd be surprised if it was in breach, but in any case it sure looks 
>>> on topic and in compliance with list norms.
>>> -AA.
>>> Tomasz Ciolek wrote:
>>>> Dear Sir,
>>>> This message is in breach of the Australian Spam ACT 2003. Please
>>>> refrain from sending commercial messages UNLESS they are in 
>>>> complaince
>>>> with the Act and you do HAVE conscent of the list owners and 
>>>> members to
>>>> send such messages.
Kim Holburn
IT Manager, Canberra Research Laboratory
National Information and Communication Technology Australia
Ph: +61 2 61258620 M: +61 417820641
Email: kim.holburn at anu.edu.au  - PGP Public Key on request

Democracy imposed from without is the severest form of tyranny.
                           -- Lloyd Biggle, Jr. Analog, Apr 1961

More information about the linux mailing list