Inclusion of Bulk Mailers????

http://dmoz.org/Computers/Software/I.../Bulk_Mailers/

OK I admit it. I am spam intollerant. We distribute free real time blacklists.

With that disclaimer in mind, some - if not most - of the sites listed in this category are spamware. Inceed, if I took the time, I could get most of these removed by their hosting companies (I won't - at least not today). The broader question is why these deserve DMOZ inclusion at all. Aren't these enablers of illegal conduct?

Example (just one of many): Wilcom2 Incorporated - Ken Mail Server. Sends bulk mail in HTML format using multiple threads and also acts as a mail server.

Looking at the site, we find the following infomation: "Is Bulk Email Legal?
. . . The 105th session of Congress has adjourned without passing any news laws on this issue. Currently, no specific federal statute exists that regulates junk email."

As most of us know, the 108th Congress acted differently and passed the Can Spam act which became effective on 1 January, 2004.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's another GEM: YesGoal, Inc - Products include Email Address Finder 1.5 a bulk email sender and email address finder. http://www.yesgoal.com/finder/finder.htm

"Power Email Harvester is bulk email software that extracts email addresses and sends bulk email. Power Email Harvester is the only bulk email software available that can build an emailing list and send bulk email to each email address at the same time! And the program is so simple to use. It can be mastered in 5 minutes."

Forget that it's unlawful to send email to harvested email addresses. People wait YEARS to have legitimate non-commercial sites listed and, yet, content like THIS is included in DMOZ. That just doesn't make sense.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A number of the sites listed in this category are associated with ROKSO operators, for example: http://www.spamhaus.org/ROKSO/listin...pammer=Traffix (which includes Boca Networks.

Although Bulkmail software can be used to send spam it can also be used for normal and acceptable business practices.

pvgool said:

Although Bulkmail software can be used to send spam it can also be used for normal and acceptable business practices.

Click to expand...

Actually, that a non-sequitur. Feel free to contact me directly at davidhart - at - tqmcube.com and I'll provide a full explanation.

DMOZ policy precludes "material that advocates, solicits or abets illegal activity"

Many of these sites sell address harvesting software and SMTP bots. Most of the software facilitates use through a proxy which usually means stealing someone else's bandwidth to send spam. Most ISPs have rate limiting which prohibits the use of these products without some form of cloaking. Of the two sites I mentioned, one says that spamming is legal; The other sells software that is illegal for ANYONE to use.

Once I get a response on these two, I'll go through the rest of the list.

I hate to harp on this. I have received no replies in this forum or from my contact to the editor. There are other issues:

None of these sites have the necessary disclaimers.

Most of these software packages create a local smtp server. That is a direct violation of most ISP's Acceptable Use Policy/Terms of Service unless the user has a STATIC business loop.

AOL and most properly administered mail servers will NOT accept email from dynamic/residential space. Residential purchasers of this software are wasting their money.

The alternative is to send email - using this software - through one's ISP. However, most ISPs have very small limits. Many are as low as 50 emails with substantively similar content without their prior consent.

I previously pointed out that a number of these sites offer mail harvesting software which is blatantly illegal to use to send bulk mail. A number of duplicated "affliate" content.

>>Although Bulkmail software can be used to send spam it can also be used for normal and acceptable business practices.

>Actually, that a non-sequitur.

Yes, but you have to set your priorities. I'm currently spending all my time attempting to suppress the sale of claw hammers: and I admit, they do have legal uses, but they can also be used to forcibly remove the product tags from mattresses and pillows -- and possibly have other illegal uses.

We'll get around to the bulk mailers in time, but you have to admit, there are a lot of objects on planet earth that have potentially felonious utilizations.

Rocks...after I ban hammers I gotta work on banning any form of sedimentary, igneous, or metamorphic material of relative hardness greater than two....

eyecon said:

I hate to harp on this. I have received no replies in this forum or from my contact to the editor. There are other issues:

None of these sites have the necessary disclaimers.

Most of these software packages create a local smtp server. That is a direct violation of most ISP's Acceptable Use Policy/Terms of Service unless the user has a STATIC business loop.

AOL and most properly administered mail servers will NOT accept email from dynamic/residential space. Residential purchasers of this software are wasting their money.

The alternative is to send email - using this software - through one's ISP. However, most ISPs have very small limits. Many are as low as 50 emails with substantively similar content without their prior consent.

I previously pointed out that a number of these sites offer mail harvesting software which is blatantly illegal to use to send bulk mail.

Click to expand...

These are all not a problem regarding the listings in DMOZ.
DMOZ is not the internetpolice. The software itself is not illegal and it can be used for legal actions.
Where do you want to draw the line if we would start to remove these sites. I can drive a car above the speedlimit, which is illegal. Must we now delete all sites about cars.

eyecon said:

A number of duplicated "affliate" content.

Click to expand...

This is something we care about. You can report them in the thread called Report Hijacks, Dead Links, Inappropriate ODP Content, and other issues here ONLY

OK, I'll show my stupidity first.

I mean this in no way a sarcastic comment, but what legal uses exist for bulkmailers?

Also, if somebody's sending out bulk emails, do you really think they're smart enough to check in DMOZ? I mean... most people I talk to have never even heard of DMOZ...

~Polly

pvgool said:

These are all not a problem regarding the listings in DMOZ.
DMOZ is not the internetpolice. The software itself is not illegal and it can be used for legal actions.

Click to expand...

How about those sites in the cat that sell email harvesting software? There is NO legal use for that. At leat one site sells a whois harvester which is a direct violation of acceptable use policy of the whois database and illegal under federal law to use for email.

pvgool said:

Where do you want to draw the line if we would start to remove these sites. I can drive a car above the speedlimit, which is illegal. Must we now delete all sites about cars.

Click to expand...

That's hyperbole. At the end of the day, this is spam software sold to spammers. While there may be some legitimate use, this is intended to abet criminal activity. I installed a few of these (those that would run in wine). They generally provide a facility for obfuscating headers and doing other things that are patently illegal.

I'm an anti-spam advocate myself. That said, do you subscribe to any mailing lists? Those are done by bulk mailers. One of our local churches used to use this type of software to send it's newsletter to members; some likely still do so. It's a simple way for small organizations with newsletters to ditribute it to their readers. A user group I belonged to some years ago did the same thing.

There are legitimate uses for this type software despite it's often misuse and perhaps some specific listings could use a look. Sites for the type of software itself in general do not merit removal simply because it can be misused. There are legitimate uses for keyloggers despite their misues, and handguns despite their misuse, etc.

Callimachus said:

I'm an anti-spam advocate myself. That said, do you subscribe to any mailing lists? Those are done by bulk mailers.

Click to expand...

I susbscribe to MANY mailing lists. NONE are served by any of the subject mail clients. That said, I have made my point which, I conceded in the OP, was biased. I think that the discussion is worthwhile as an issue of quality.

Would anyone disagree that sites offering harvesting software and smtp bots should not be included in the ODP as these have no legitimate purpose?

That kind of discussion would have to be done in our internal forums, not here.

eyecon]OK I admit it. I am spam [b]intollerant[/b said:

. We distribute free real time blacklists.

Click to expand...

Ah.. a Jamie-ism

Bulk mailers are certainly not illegal - people do maintain mailing lists for legitimate email newsletters and the like.

Address harvesters.. well, I'm afraid to say that there's nothing illegal (AFAIK) about selling them, or even using them to harvest addresses. Now, sending spam is illegal in many territories, and there's precious little you can do with an address harvester other than sending spam. There are two relevant parts from the guidelines that are of interest:

Sites with unlawful content should not be listed in the directory, particularly those intent and substantially focused on making available and distributing illegal materials. Examples of content that is illegal in most jurisdictions include child pornography; material that infringes on intellectual property rights; material that advocates, solicits or abets illegal activity (such as fraud or violence) in specific instances; and material that is libelous. Factual and how-to information is generally NOT abetting illegal conduct unless its intent is to facilitate the immediate commission of a crime in a specific situation.

Click to expand...

and

The evaluation of the potential illegality of a given site is often difficult and requires case-by-case review, particularly in cases of copyright and trademark infringement. We don't expect editors to be legal experts or the Internet police. Editors should consult with ODP staff about all legal issues. The ODP staff reserves the right to delete or modify site listings at their discretion.

Click to expand...

Of course, if the sale of address harvesting software was illegal then it would be a much simpler issue.