James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
I'm number 1,229!
I'm number 1,229!
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations gkittelson on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Spamhaus loses court fight to spammers
- Thread starter 2ffat
- Start date
- Status
James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
I'm number 1,229!
I'm number 1,229!
AnotherHiggins
Technical User
To be fair - of course they won. Spamhaus didn't show up to defend themselves. Why should they? As they point out, a ruling in an American court isn't legally binding for them (a British company) and won't affect the way they operate.
I understand why they ignored it, but the judge didn't have much choice, did he? It was basically a forfeit.
Well, actually, I guess the case could have been thrown out as being without merit....
[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]
Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.
I understand why they ignored it, but the judge didn't have much choice, did he? It was basically a forfeit.
Well, actually, I guess the case could have been thrown out as being without merit....
[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]
Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.
Of course, the ruling was a farce because they proberbly have broken so many UK laws when it comes to spamming.
Offering perscription drugs
Sending P*rn to minors
The Data Protection act
The Computer misuse act
etc etc...
Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004
Offering perscription drugs
Sending P*rn to minors
The Data Protection act
The Computer misuse act
etc etc...
Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004
A few updates...
This case has the possibility of setting a few precedents. It's certainly caused an uproar on USENET and a few e-mail abuse discussion boards! Here's a few links found in nan-ae
Spamhaus has told a U.S. court that it will appeal a recent decision that threatened to shut it down.
ICANN Statement
And of course Spamhaus' site:
This case has the possibility of setting a few precedents. It's certainly caused an uproar on USENET and a few e-mail abuse discussion boards! Here's a few links found in nan-ae
Spamhaus has told a U.S. court that it will appeal a recent decision that threatened to shut it down.
ICANN Statement
And of course Spamhaus' site:
I am a little ambivalent about this. My ISP's various servers find their way from time to time onto some RBL, and my mail returns unread, or some other person's mail does not get to me because it is rejected by one of them. In the most irritating instance I couldn't send mail because the list (they I assume subscribed to for money) listed their own servers. (This is SBC/ATT - not some little guy).
God knows I abhor spam and am happy not to get it, but at times I wonder if the rewards, emotional or financial, for getting the bad guys don't sent the watchdogs a little over the edge.
God knows I abhor spam and am happy not to get it, but at times I wonder if the rewards, emotional or financial, for getting the bad guys don't sent the watchdogs a little over the edge.
I stopped being ambivalent when I began running my own mail server and saw the massive quantities of downright garbage trying to come through. I only have aobut 80 users, and since Monday, thanks to miscellaneous RBL's that I use, I've managed to block over 15,000 e-mails. If my users double, the spam will double.
It's not the "watchdogs" that you should worry about, it's those that think their commercial speech qualifies as first amendment protected speech. They get all fired up over their spam runs being blocked, and file lawsuits that may or may not have any merit because no one wants their e-mail. They don't realize that their freedom of speech ends at the edge of my private property.
And another update to this situation...
The judge ruled that e360's motion to the court (to have ICANN yank registration, Tucows yank registration, shut down Spamhaus, charge Spamhaus daily until they were off the RBL, and criminally charge US users of the Spamhaus RBL) was overly broad and dismissed it. There's a few interesting discussions in nan-ae about it.
It's not the "watchdogs" that you should worry about, it's those that think their commercial speech qualifies as first amendment protected speech. They get all fired up over their spam runs being blocked, and file lawsuits that may or may not have any merit because no one wants their e-mail. They don't realize that their freedom of speech ends at the edge of my private property.
And another update to this situation...
The judge ruled that e360's motion to the court (to have ICANN yank registration, Tucows yank registration, shut down Spamhaus, charge Spamhaus daily until they were off the RBL, and criminally charge US users of the Spamhaus RBL) was overly broad and dismissed it. There's a few interesting discussions in nan-ae about it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Helpful tip