On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Simon Lyall wrote:
As aothers having stated the only long term method of fixing the problem is to shift the support costs onto the mailwasher authors.
Might this be a new tactic? Take a leaf out of the anti-spam handbook, and contact Mailwasher to advise them that you will begin invoicing them for all future bounce handling after xyz date, if they don't remove the bounce feature. Make sure the date is far enough in advance that they do have time to modify the software, and then carry through with it. As far as Steve's "convoluted interpretation" of the Crimes Act goes, S.250 states: (2) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who intentionally or recklessly, and without authorisation, knowing that he or she is not authorised, or being reckless as to whether or not he or she is authorised, (a) damages, deletes, modifies, or otherwise interferes with or impairs any data or software in any computer system; or (b) causes any data or software in any computer system to be damaged, deleted, modified, or otherwise interfered with or impaired; or (c) causes any computer system to (i) fail; or (ii) deny service to any authorised users. It's not at all a stretch to view MW as enabling contravention of para c, and 251 makes it a crime to make, sell or supply enabling software. -- Matthew Poole "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."