Fwd: RE: Question on FaxConnect Results..

Fwd: RE: Question on FaxConnect Results..

Michael Crawford mcrawford at iready.com
Fri Feb 5 12:36:44 EST 1999


I like the idea of only watermarking GSTN pages.  Again the concern is legal
documents...maybe this is a small segment of the market and thus is not all
that important...I'd have to look at that.  Maybe a legal eagle could tell
us how SMTP and IPP transactions would be viewed in terms of "traceability"
and "responsibility"...  The rest is just a matter of software :)

Mike Crawford
iReady Corporation

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Dan Wing [SMTP:dwing at cisco.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, February 04, 1999 5:40 PM
> To:	Michael Crawford
> Cc:	Richard Shockey; ifx at pwg.org
> Subject:	RE: Fwd: RE: Question on FaxConnect Results..
> 
> On Thu, 4 Feb 1999 16:47:56 -0800, Michael Crawford wrote:
> 
> > Isn't the issue a legal requirement in some states and some
> countries...i.e.
> > page 1 of ... and who originated the document.? 
> 
> It is a legal requirement in the US (and Germany?) that the sender
> be identified on the first page or on each page.  Richard has the
> exact wording.
> 
> The legal requirement only exists on a media where spamming is a favorite
> sport, and where Caller-ID (identification of the caller) isn't available
> everywhere -- in fact, doesn't exist in most places and within most
> companies due to their PBXs.
> 
> Thus, fax machines, which cannot be assured their users will actually
> *use* a coverpage, simply watermark pages that are transmitted over
> GSTN.
> 
> This is a good thing.  And a service to users so that the user isn't
> non-compliant with the letter of the (FCC) law.
> 
> > If this is the case, then
> > the user benefits from a watermark, assuming 
> > this kind of data is part of that watermark.  And may be in fact
> required to
> > have the watermark for the document to be useable for any number of
> > transactions. Or did I miss something?  (ignorance is bliss?)
> 
> But IPP (and SMTP) provide _different_ mechanisms for tracing the
> message.  In fact, even LPR/LPD provides a different mechanism (IP address
> of connection, username of submitter in the LPR data).  
> 
> What I'm saying is that we should NOT watermark pages unless those
> pages are being transmitted over the GSTN.  If they're going over SMTP or
> IPP then the mechanisms of SMTP should be used (which are adequate) or the
> mechanisms of IPP should be used (which I believe are adequate).
> 
> -Dan Wing
> 



More information about the Ifx mailing list