[There are two more points to be made about Mailblocks: First, as highlighted on Slashdot (http://slashdot.org/articles/03/03/23/2035250.shtml), why would Mailblocks "old terms of service" agreement permit spamming in the first place? What did these folks have in mind? Second, the current version gives Mailblocks the right to "change" their policy at any time without users' consent, and without even notifying them. Mailblocks is hardly required to concoct that kind of infinitely plastic agreement, and because it chose to, users should consider themselves warned. Previous Politech message: http://www.politechbot.com/p-04585.html --Declan] --- To: declanat_private cc: politechat_private Subject: Re: FC: Mailblocks changes privacy policy, won't spam customers Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 00:16:00 -0800 > "... we reserve the right to release information > concerning any visitor or member ... to > protect the interests of Mailblocks, our members or others ... I.e. they will release your private info anytime that releasing it benefits anybody. Or they "reserve the right" to, anyway. I.e. their privacy policy says that you have no privacy. Yeah, I know, what's new? A commercial company that has a privacy policy that says you have no privacy. Ho hum. Another company to NOT do business with. Finding good help is so hard these days. John --- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:12:57 -0500 To: declanat_private From: Kevin Werbach <kevinat_private> Subject: Re: FC: Why is Mailblocks' approach different? (Answer: It isn't) FYI, putting aside the PR puffery and media reprinting of same, Mailblocks doesn't claim to be the first challenge/response implementation. They claim to have: (1) done extensive user testing to overcome some of the problems others have identified (draw your own conclusions), and (2) purchased already-issued patents that give them control over the fundamental IP around the mechanism (ditto). Personally, I think they would be better off selling Mailblocks as a better Webmail experience to Yahoo/Hotmail (it is), rather than a magic bullet for spam. On the other hand, whitelists will become more prevalent, whether people like it or not. I get several hundred spams a day, which I'm barely able to keep in check through several layers of Bayesian and rule-based filters. Configuring and regularly checking the filters takes me more time than I'm sure most users are willing to invest. As spam gets worse, shifting the burden to senders will sound appealing to a lot of people. -k- --------------------------------------------------------------------- KEVIN WERBACH kevinat_private Supernova Group, LLC 1 (877) 803-7101 (voicemail/fax) http://werbach.com Weblog -- http://werblog.com *** SUPERNOVA 2003, July 8-9, DC -- http://www.pulver.com/supernova/ --- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 13:45:23 -0600 From: Stan Robins <srobinsat_private> Organization: Robins Analytics, Inc. To: Declan McCullagh <declanat_private> Subject: Re: FC: Why is Mailblocks' approach different? (Answer: It isn't) Hello Declan, I haven't received the "next Politech message" (FC: Mailblocks changes privacy policy, won't spam customers ) yet, but I read it on the web site. Mailblocks leaves a large loophole in their revised Terms of Use and Privacy Policy in that they do not say whether they classify a user's email address as "Personal" or as "Non-personal" information. Essentially, they still reserve the right to cause a user, by virtue of subscribing to the service, to be spammed in the future. -- Best regards, Stan Robins Email: srobinsat_private Using The Bat, 1.61 www.ritlabs.com --- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 22:32:21 +0100 To: declanat_private From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowlesat_private> Subject: Re: FC: Mailblocks changes privacy policy, won't spam customers Cc: politechat_private At 1:41 PM -0500 2003/03/25, Declan McCullagh wrote: > My understanding from a fellow journalist who spoke to the company > yesterday is that Mailblocks accidentally placed an old placeholder > version of their privacy policy when they put the new site up > yesterday. They planned to fix it Monday evening, and apparently > they have. Looking at <http://www.mailblocks.com/helplet/privacy-policy.htm> and <http://www.mailblocks.com/helplet/terms-of-service.htm>, they are both still dated "March 17, 2003", and say things like: 1. Services. Mailblocks provides a fast, low-cost email service to its users. Other new features may be added in the future; unless expressly stated otherwise, any new or enhanced features will be subject to the then-current version of this Agreement. In exchange for your use of the Services, you expressly permit and authorize Company, and such third parties as may be authorized by Company, to furnish to you from time to time, through the Services or any other means, with information prepared by Company or by (or on behalf of) other entities, including onsite advertisements (such information, "Third Party Content" or "Advertising"). You acknowledge that such Third Party Content may be an inseparable part of the Services, and that furnishing such Third Party Content to you cannot be terminated unless the Services are terminated. Company neither endorses nor is responsible for Third Party Content, and you may be exposed to Third Party Content that is offensive, inaccurate, misleading, deceptive, out-of-date, or incomplete. You must evaluate, and bear all risks associated with, the Third Party Content, and your use of and reliance on any such content. We are not responsible for any errors or omissions in Third Party Content, for hyperlinks embedded in Third Party Content or for any results obtained from the use of such content. Under no circumstances will we be liable for any loss or damage caused by your reliance on any such Third Party Content. Your correspondence or business dealings with, or participation in promotions sponsored by, any such third party advertisers, or any other third party providers of goods or services accessed through the Services, and any terms, conditions, warranties or representations associated with such dealings, are solely between you and such third party advertiser or provider. And (2) Personally identifiable information: Mailblocks collects personally identifiable information during the registration process, and this Privacy Policy serves as notice that such information is collected under those circumstances. You must complete the registration process if you wish to use Mailblocks' Services. Not now, but in the future, Mailblocks may permit third parties, such as advertisers, to furnish our members, through the Services and otherwise, with information from time to time. In these cases, your personally identifiable information is not transferred to the advertiser. [ ... deletia ... ] If and when Mailblocks, or a third party in conjunction with Mailblocks, sponsors promotions or sweepstakes, either Mailblocks or the third party will post relevant privacy information in the official rules and/or registration area for the promotion or sweepstakes. That privacy information, to the extent it conflicts with this Privacy Policy, will govern that particular promotion or sweepstakes. You will never be entered into any promotion or sweepstakes without your "opt-in" consent. In other words, they still reserve the right to spam you. -- Brad Knowles, <brad.knowlesat_private> "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++) --- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:01:04 0000 From: "Martin" <martinat_private> Subject: http://politechbot.com/p-04580.html To: declanat_private Two claims from the front page of http://www.mailblocks.com ---quote--- # Mailblocks is a new class of email service that completely rids your Inbox of spam and offers the powerful features you want in your web mail. # Mailblocks was designed to perform like an application. It's as fast over dial-up as other web mail services perform over broadband. --end-quote--- All extraordinary claims require extraodinary justification. So where is their justification for these two extrodinary claims? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH evening reception in New York City at 7 pm, April 1, 2003 at CFP: http://www.politechbot.com/events/cfp2003/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Mar 26 2003 - 14:24:02 PST