On 10/11/2006 1:16 AM, Jason Haar wrote: > If Spamhaus lose this lawsuit (which they are ignoring as they are
they lost it a while ago. summary judgement was in september. the latest papers are because spamhaus didn't comply with the default judgement. pretty routine stuff. > "Americans to arms" I say... Start sending "Internet for Dummies" to the > judge for starters ;-) Actually the judge seems to have left an out for spamhaus in the original default judgement. Excerpting myself: "the original default injunctive order states that Spamhaus must not interfere with Mr. Linhardt's e-mail messages "...unless Spamhaus can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that Plaintiffs have violated relevant United States law." Well, that should be easy enough--there are millions of people who have received his spam, and it seems to be in violation of the CAN-SPAM act as I know it (and the judge might know it, too). Once demonstrated, the injunction would be partially lifted automatically. Better yet, affected parties could then pursue damages against Mr. Linhardt of their own, thus forcing him to back down. The problem here is that Spamhaus isn't subject to U.S. jurisdiction (as it has argued itself) and so isn't eligible for relief under the CAN-SPAM act, either. Instead, it needs a U.S.-based partner to pursue this angle on its behalf. Worse, due to the way that the CAN-SPAM act is written, only certain parties can sue for damages, which further limits the pool of potential partners. However, many of the organizations that are eligible for relief are also some of Spamhaus' biggest beneficiaries (namely the ISPs that rely most on its filters), and so there should be a natural pool of willing partners for Spamhaus to choose from." http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2006/10/spamhaus_needs.html -- Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
