Realtime Blackhole List
Dial-up User List
Relay Spam Stopper
REALTIME BLACKHOLE LIST
Table of Contents:
Ultimately, the board of
MAPS believes that new laws will need to be created to
address the problem of Internet mail abuse. One way to do
this is by lobbying legislators, and our allies at CAUCE are working on that angle.
Another way to do this is with case law, as was the
result of the famous Roe vs. Wade
decision of 1973. It's our hope that MAPS can help bring
about a similar landmark case and carry it all the way to
the Supreme Court where federal case law can result.
The principle we wish to
see established conclusively is that all
communications must be mutually consensual.
Although holders of Internet mailboxes give implied
consent to receive person-to-person e-mail concerning
topics on which they have demonstrated a specific
interest, this principle does not
carry over to unsolicited bulk e-mail of any kind. Laws
have already been enacted against robotic telephone
solicitations and junk faxes based on the costs imposed
on recipients by these advertising methods.
Holders of Internet
mailboxes pay real costs -- money, time and other
resources -- for each and every e-mail message they
receive. It is immoral not only to force them to pay to
receive unsolicited messages, but also to insist that
they either manually filter or use special filtering
software to avoid reading e-mail they never consented to
receive, either implicitly or explicitly.
One way to exercise the
right of mutual consent in all communications is to
refuse some or all traffic from some other network or
networks, at the sole discretion of the refuser, for any
reason they deem sufficient, or for no reason at all.
This is what the subscribers to the MAPS Realtime
Blackhole List (RBL) do, by refusing traffic from all
sources we put on our list. If this refusal is found
constitutional, then that constitutionality can and will
form the basis for other, lower court decisions
concerning the refusal of other traffic and ultimately,
we hope, other decisions concerning the lack of implied
consent to unsolicited bulk e-mail itself.
organizations have threatened legal action against MAPS
in the past. Some of them sound like they are serious and
well funded. We list them here, along with pointers to
some of the mail we've exchanged with them, in hopes that
other organizations with similar interests can see what
ground has already been covered and, if they desire, seek
common cause with their fellows. The fundamental
viewpoint shared by all of these organizations is that they
each believe that nonconsensual communications ought not
be prevented. If you agree with this
viewpoint, then perhaps you should work together with
them on a class action lawsuit against MAPS.
We keep on file all
offers and pledges of support for our legal defense. If
you'd like to be on our list of people we'll inform when
and if a lawsuit is ever filed against us, please let us know -- and thanks!
and Nick Nicholas, last revised: Feb. 29,
MAPS thanks its
supporters for making its continuing operations possible.
MAPS is particularly grateful to the organizations listed
on our Supporters page for their generous support.