This spam talks about a anti spam law passed by the US, is it true...?
Regards, Dean.
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002 17:02:54 +0000 "chubarovandrey" <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 10:05:03PM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> This spam talks about a anti spam law passed by the US, is it true...?
Go see: http://www.cauce.org
I have seen that particular one in SPANISH language sent from Brazilia,
as if proposed (but never ratified) US legistlation has any relevance
to people anywhere. Referral to the "murkowsky" spam-bill is direct
admittance that it is spam.
> Regards, Dean.
/Matti Aarnio
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002 [email protected] wrote:
> This spam talks about a anti spam law passed by the US, is it true...?
No. Bill S. 1618 has never been passed. Note that this does
make a good regexp since any email claiming to be compliant
with this bill is known to be spam.
This is also a nice illustration of:
Rule #1: spammers lie
Rik
--
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
Current spamtrap: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]">[email protected]</a>