Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

>> 
>> It was Mr. Charles Benn who, according to the service of process affidavit, 
>> was authorized to receive process on their behalf. 
> 
> It won't surprise you to learn that we have absolutely no clue who "Charles 
> Benn" is, literally never heard of the guy.

Steve, my working theory is that Charlie Benn is a receptionist at the W1 
communications office building which you used to list as an address;  I've seen 
this sort of scenario happen on several occasions, and the proof of service 
filed by the process server bears that out.  Of course, if he could not accept 
service for Spamhaus he should have told the process server so, instead of 
accepting service.  Given that the location is a virtual office type place, in 
which, I imagine, nobody from Spamhaus has set foot in some years (if ever), it 
makes perfect sense that nobody in our communities knows who Charlie Benn is, 
if he is the receptionist at such a place.  

Anne

--
Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant, GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Steve Linford via mailop]

On 4 Aug 2020, at 11:32, Laura Atkins via mailop  wrote:
> 
> It was Mr. Charles Benn who, according to the service of process affidavit, 
> was authorized to receive process on their behalf. 

It won't surprise you to learn that we have absolutely no clue who "Charles 
Benn" is, literally never heard of the guy.

I shouldn't comment really but this Nebraska default judgment is a wad of utter 
garbage if you ask me, oops I didn't type that did I, ohh good, disregard.

Regards,

  Steve Linford
  Chief Executive
  The Spamhaus Project
  https://www.spamhaus.org
  




___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Steve Linford via mailop]

On 4 Aug 2020, at 04:29, John Levine via mailop  wrote:
> 
> In article <28453035-f078-4311-8472-1aa190c45...@isipp.com 
> > you write:
>> 
>> 
>> From the judgement:
>> 
>> "he plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and 
>> personally served a representative authorized to accept service
>> of process in London."
> 
> The Spamhaus Project has not been located in the UK for a long time.
> Whoever the process server handed his paperwork to, it wasn't
> Spamhaus.
> 
> Ever since the E360 fiasco Spamhaus hasn't responded to US suits. They
> have no assets in the US, and while responding to tell the US court
> that it doesn't have jurisdiction is possible, it's expensive and not
> very productive.
> 
> They really do have their office in Andorra and could be served or
> sued there, but I doubt the kinds of organizations that are likely to
> sue them would make much headway in Andorran courts.
> 
> It is my impression that for this particular suit, Spamhaus wasn't
> even aware of it until someone noticed a press release.

What John said.

Regards,

  Steve Linford
  Chief Executive
  The Spamhaus Project
  https://www.spamhaus.org
  

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

> Another relevant piece of data. The organization that was named in the suit 
> and has received a permanent injunction against it has been voluntarily 
> dissolved and struck off the UK registry of companies. 
> 
> https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05303831
> 
> There is no one covered under this injunction as the entity does not exist. 

They still technically (at least nominally) seemed to have an agent for service 
in London, who was served in October, 2019;  Spamhaus didn't dissolve  that 
particular UK entity until March of 2020 (see 
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05303831), five months after they 
were (ostensibly) served in London.  Also, SpamhausTech still lists its address 
as being in London - so under the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil (i.e. 
a court may find that they can't claim they don't exist in the UK if they have 
an affiliated entity that does) they can/could have/may be able to enforce 
against them:  https://www.spamhaustech.com/privacy-policy/

Of course, this is all basically mooted by the fact that the final judgement 
was only for $1 as DBUSA never submitted a damages accounting, and they are in 
Chapter 11, so it seems highly unlikely that they are going to spend money to 
pursue this on the off chance that they might pervail.

Anne

--
Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
CEO, SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Ken Simpson via mailop]

Curious. The document was served last September, if I'm reading it
correctly. Yet the organization was dissolved in March 2020. I suppose they
can enjoy the rich rewards of collecting from a dissolved entity in a
foreign country.

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 2:35 AM Laura Atkins via mailop 
wrote:

>
>
> On 4 Aug 2020, at 03:29, John Levine via mailop  wrote:
>
> In article <28453035-f078-4311-8472-1aa190c45...@isipp.com> you write:
>
>
>
> Did you not read what I quoted from the Spamhaus website? They are based
> in Switzerland and Andorra, not the UK. My assumption is that there is
> basically no chance of any U.S. ruling being enforced in either of these
> two countries, unless it is related to a serious crime.
>
>
> From the judgement:
>
> "he plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and
> personally served a representative authorized to accept service
> of process in London."
>
>
> The Spamhaus Project has not been located in the UK for a long time.
> Whoever the process server handed his paperwork to, it wasn't
> Spamhaus.
>
>
> It was Mr. Charles Benn who, according to the service of process
> affidavit, was authorized to receive process on their behalf.
>
>
> https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16243626/6/databaseusacom-llc-v-the-spamhaus-project/
>
>
> Ever since the E360 fiasco Spamhaus hasn't responded to US suits. They
> have no assets in the US, and while responding to tell the US court
> that it doesn't have jurisdiction is possible, it's expensive and not
> very productive.
>
> They really do have their office in Andorra and could be served or
> sued there, but I doubt the kinds of organizations that are likely to
> sue them would make much headway in Andorran courts.
>
> It is my impression that for this particular suit, Spamhaus wasn't
> even aware of it until someone noticed a press release.
>
>
> Hah.
>
> Another relevant piece of data. The organization that was named in the
> suit and has received a permanent injunction against it has been
> voluntarily dissolved and struck off the UK registry of companies.
>
> https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05303831
>
> There is no one covered under this injunction as the entity does not
> exist.
>
> laura
>
> --
> Having an Email Crisis?  We can help! 800 823-9674
>
> Laura Atkins
> Word to the Wise
> la...@wordtothewise.com
> (650) 437-0741
>
> Email Delivery Blog: https://wordtothewise.com/blog
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>


-- 

Ken Simpson

CEO, MailChannels


Tel: +1 604 685 7488
Facebook   |  Twitter   |
LinkedIn  |  Help Center


Our latest case study video: watch here!

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Jay Hennigan via mailop]

On 8/4/20 09:24, Rob Nagler via mailop wrote:
It is actually more sinister than anybody realizes. I did some research 
into Charles "Charlie" Benn.


He is working on new technology  to get 
spam into the UK and the EU. 


RFC1149 has been around since 1990, not exactly what I'd call new 
technology.


--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Rob Nagler via mailop]

It is actually more sinister than anybody realizes. I did some research
into Charles "Charlie" Benn.

He is working on new technology  to get
spam into the UK and the EU. He works undercover for a real estate company
 (note that he
doesn't appear  on their
staff page).  I believe he's actually an Eastern European with bases in
East London, ZA and Reading, UK. He falsely accepted service to undermine
Spamhaus, which has been hunting him for years.

Rob
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Jay Hennigan via mailop]

On 8/4/20 06:07, Chris via mailop wrote:

On 2020-08-04 05:32, Laura Atkins via mailop wrote:

It was Mr. Charles Benn who, according to the service of process 
affidavit, was authorized to receive process on their behalf.


Actually, "Charlie Benn".

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16243626/6/databaseusacom-llc-v-the-spamhaus-project/ 



It's my impression that nobody has the slightest idea who this is, or 
why anyone would think this person is "authorized".


Reading between the lines about "virtual office" and "Communications 
House", it sounds like the UK equivalent of the guy behind the counter 
at a Mailboxes Etc. or UPS Store.


Note also that the process server didn't check the box stating that he 
served the summons.



--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case, Against The Spamhaus Project

[Joel M Snyder via mailop]

On 8/4/20 2:33 AM, mailop-requ...@mailop.org wrote:
> Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case
>   Against The Spamhaus Project

The astonishing thing about all this is that DatabaseUSA bothered to
dump thousands and thousands of dollars into lawyers to achieve a
completely null result.

Apparently, whatever law firm they hired did not appropriately advise
them that this was a completely useless endeavor and waste of resources,
or, alternatively, the client did not listen to this sage advice and
insisted on moving forward anyway.  In either case, yay for the
DatabaseUSA contribution to the US service economy!   No PPP required
for these lawyers!

I know that judges are not technical experts and this one probably just
wanted to get this off his docket as quickly as possible, but I would
have loved to be in the room watching if someone brought up the
databaseusa home page and he then asked "under what possible definition
of unsolicited bulk email does this company get excluded?"

Their lawyers were also quite clever in their wording of the complaint,
dropping the part about "unsolicited bulk email" and asserting that they
weren't phishing, 419 scamming, etc.  A nice omission which a defense
attorney would have jumped on but since there wasn't any.

Oh well.  I think that "concerning" is not the word.  I think that
"amusing" is the word.

jms

-- 
Joel M Snyder, 1404 East Lind Road, Tucson, AZ, 85719
Senior Partner, Opus One   Phone: +1 520 324 0494
j...@opus1.comhttp://www.opus1.com/jms

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Chris via mailop]

On 2020-08-04 09:38, Laura Atkins via mailop wrote:



On 4 Aug 2020, at 14:07, Chris via mailop It's my impression that nobody has the slightest idea who this is, or 
why anyone would think this person is "authorized”.


Which means the process server committed perjury as this was a sworn 
affidavit.


Sure does.

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Laura Atkins via mailop]

> On 4 Aug 2020, at 14:07, Chris via mailop  wrote:
> 
> On 2020-08-04 05:32, Laura Atkins via mailop wrote:
> 
>> It was Mr. Charles Benn who, according to the service of process affidavit, 
>> was authorized to receive process on their behalf.
>> https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16243626/6/databaseusacom-llc-v-the-spamhaus-project/
> 
> It's my impression that nobody has the slightest idea who this is, or why 
> anyone would think this person is "authorized”.

Which means the process server committed perjury as this was a sworn affidavit. 

laura 



-- 
Having an Email Crisis?  We can help! 800 823-9674 

Laura Atkins
Word to the Wise
la...@wordtothewise.com
(650) 437-0741  

Email Delivery Blog: https://wordtothewise.com/blog 







___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Chris via mailop]

On 2020-08-04 05:32, Laura Atkins via mailop wrote:

It was Mr. Charles Benn who, according to the service of process 
affidavit, was authorized to receive process on their behalf.


https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16243626/6/databaseusacom-llc-v-the-spamhaus-project/


It's my impression that nobody has the slightest idea who this is, or 
why anyone would think this person is "authorized".


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Laura Atkins via mailop]

> On 4 Aug 2020, at 03:29, John Levine via mailop  wrote:
> 
> In article <28453035-f078-4311-8472-1aa190c45...@isipp.com> you write:
>> 
>> 
>>> Did you not read what I quoted from the Spamhaus website? They are based
>>> in Switzerland and Andorra, not the UK. My assumption is that there is
>>> basically no chance of any U.S. ruling being enforced in either of these
>>> two countries, unless it is related to a serious crime.
>> 
>> From the judgement:
>> 
>> "he plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and 
>> personally served a representative authorized to accept service
>> of process in London."
> 
> The Spamhaus Project has not been located in the UK for a long time.
> Whoever the process server handed his paperwork to, it wasn't
> Spamhaus.

It was Mr. Charles Benn who, according to the service of process affidavit, was 
authorized to receive process on their behalf. 

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16243626/6/databaseusacom-llc-v-the-spamhaus-project/
 



> Ever since the E360 fiasco Spamhaus hasn't responded to US suits. They
> have no assets in the US, and while responding to tell the US court
> that it doesn't have jurisdiction is possible, it's expensive and not
> very productive.
> 
> They really do have their office in Andorra and could be served or
> sued there, but I doubt the kinds of organizations that are likely to
> sue them would make much headway in Andorran courts.
> 
> It is my impression that for this particular suit, Spamhaus wasn't
> even aware of it until someone noticed a press release.

Hah.

Another relevant piece of data. The organization that was named in the suit and 
has received a permanent injunction against it has been voluntarily dissolved 
and struck off the UK registry of companies. 

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05303831

There is no one covered under this injunction as the entity does not exist. 

laura 

-- 
Having an Email Crisis?  We can help! 800 823-9674 

Laura Atkins
Word to the Wise
la...@wordtothewise.com
(650) 437-0741  

Email Delivery Blog: https://wordtothewise.com/blog 







___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Dave Warren via mailop]

On 2020-08-03 17:39, Jerry Cloe via mailop wrote:

It could also be argued as case law against other blacklist providers.


As I understand US law, defaults do not provide any form of precedent or 
other form of useful case law.


There might well be exceptions, of course.

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[John Levine via mailop]

In article  you write:
>Right...the thing is that a default judgement is still a judgement.  And 
>because they are in the UK doesn't mean that it can't be enforced against 
>them.. in the UK.

They're not in the UK.  They're in Andorra:

https://www.spamhaus.org/faq/section/Organization#92

I don't expect this to go away any time soon:

https://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL401826

R's,
John

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[John Levine via mailop]

In article <28453035-f078-4311-8472-1aa190c45...@isipp.com> you write:
>
>
>> Did you not read what I quoted from the Spamhaus website? They are based
>> in Switzerland and Andorra, not the UK. My assumption is that there is
>> basically no chance of any U.S. ruling being enforced in either of these
>> two countries, unless it is related to a serious crime.
>
>From the judgement:
>
>"he plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and 
>personally served a representative authorized to accept service
>of process in London."

The Spamhaus Project has not been located in the UK for a long time.
Whoever the process server handed his paperwork to, it wasn't
Spamhaus.

Ever since the E360 fiasco Spamhaus hasn't responded to US suits. They
have no assets in the US, and while responding to tell the US court
that it doesn't have jurisdiction is possible, it's expensive and not
very productive.

They really do have their office in Andorra and could be served or
sued there, but I doubt the kinds of organizations that are likely to
sue them would make much headway in Andorran courts.

It is my impression that for this particular suit, Spamhaus wasn't
even aware of it until someone noticed a press release.


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Luke via mailop]

I'm pretty sure "spammers lie" holds up in court. :P

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020, 5:59 PM Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:

>
>
> >> From the judgement:
> >> "The plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention
> and personally served a representative authorized to accept service of
> process in London."
> >
> > Rule #1 of spam: Spammers lie.
>
> Absolutely.
>
> However, a court isn't going to take a party's word that they served
> someone, you are required to file a proof of service, which is served by
> someone *other* than the party (a process server).  Parties to a lawsuit
> are not allowed to serve process on the other party, for that very reason.
>
> Anne
>
> --
> Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
> Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
> CEO, SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification
> Advisor, Governor's Innovation Response Team Task Force
> Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
> Legislative Consultant, GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
> Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
> Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
> Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
> Location: Boulder, Colorado
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

>> From the judgement:
>> "The plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and 
>> personally served a representative authorized to accept service of process 
>> in London."
> 
> Rule #1 of spam: Spammers lie.

Absolutely.

However, a court isn't going to take a party's word that they served someone, 
you are required to file a proof of service, which is served by someone *other* 
than the party (a process server).  Parties to a lawsuit are not allowed to 
serve process on the other party, for that very reason.

Anne

--
Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
CEO, SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification
Advisor, Governor's Innovation Response Team Task Force
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant, GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
Location: Boulder, Colorado
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Jay Hennigan via mailop]

On 8/3/20 17:31, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop wrote:




Did you not read what I quoted from the Spamhaus website? They are based
in Switzerland and Andorra, not the UK. My assumption is that there is
basically no chance of any U.S. ruling being enforced in either of these
two countries, unless it is related to a serious crime.


 From the judgement:

"he plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and 
personally served a representative authorized to accept service of process in 
London."


Rule #1 of spam: Spammers lie.

According to the article, the plaintiff is in BK due to ripping off 
another company to the tune of $11.2 million. I certainly wouldn't 
consider a little "sewer service" beyond someone like that.


--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

>> Did you not read what I quoted from the Spamhaus website? They are based
>> in Switzerland and Andorra, not the UK. My assumption is that there is
>> basically no chance of any U.S. ruling being enforced in either of these
>> two countries, unless it is related to a serious crime.

I should elaborate:  Spamhaus has (had?) always had offices in London.  Perhaps 
they have moved primary operations to Switzerland an Andorra, however that 
doesn't mean that they don't still have a presence in the UK, and given that 
they were served *in* the UK, that suggests that they do, in fact, still 
maintain a presence in the UK.  Now, I don't know that for certain, but I *do* 
know for certain that they were served in the UK (according to the judgement).
> 


> From the judgement:
> 
> "The plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and 
> personally served a representative authorized to accept service of process in 
> London."
> 
> Anne
> 
> --
> Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
> Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
> CEO, SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification
> Advisor, Governor's Innovation Response Team Task Force
> Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
> Legislative Consultant, GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
> Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
> Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
> Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
> Location: Boulder, Colorado
> 


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

> Did you not read what I quoted from the Spamhaus website? They are based
> in Switzerland and Andorra, not the UK. My assumption is that there is
> basically no chance of any U.S. ruling being enforced in either of these
> two countries, unless it is related to a serious crime.

From the judgement:

"he plaintiff has shown that it has complied with the Hague Convention and 
personally served a representative authorized to accept service of process in 
London."

Anne

--
Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
CEO, SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification
Advisor, Governor's Innovation Response Team Task Force
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant, GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
Location: Boulder, Colorado


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Ralph Seichter via mailop]

* Anne P. Mitchell:

> the thing is that a default judgement is still a judgement. And
> because they are in the UK doesn't mean that it can't be enforced
> against them.. in the UK.

Did you not read what I quoted from the Spamhaus website? They are based
in Switzerland and Andorra, not the UK. My assumption is that there is
basically no chance of any U.S. ruling being enforced in either of these
two countries, unless it is related to a serious crime.

-Ralph

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

> default judgment, Spamhaus is not a US organization or wasn't properly served 
> or whatever.


Right...the thing is that a default judgement is still a judgement.  And 
because they are in the UK doesn't mean that it can't be enforced against 
them.. in the UK.  Here are two good articles about enforcing U.S. judgements 
in the UK, in case anyone wants to read them or, you know, has insomnia:

https://www.penningtonslaw.com/news-publications/latest-news/2019/transatlantic-litigation-enforcing-us-judgments-in-england-and-wales

https://www.bclplaw.com/images/content/2/2/v2/2220/Bulletin-Enforcing-US-Judgments-American-version-August-2014.pdf

Note that the court has given DBUSA 30 days to come up with an accounting of 
how the Spamhaus listing impacted DBUSA monetarily.  Also note that DBUSA is 
now in Chapter 11 bankruptcy;  it will be interesting to see whether they 
attempt to attribute that to the SH listing.

Anne

--
Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
CEO, SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant, GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)



___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Jerry Cloe via mailop]

That might be a dangerous assumption (admittedly I'm no lawyer) that this means 
zip. It may not mean much against Spamhaus directly, but any kind of injunction 
against them could in theory be used against anyone who uses Spamhaus services. 
It could also be argued as case law against other blacklist providers.

 
I don't know who DatabaseUSA is, from the description really sounds like an 
email marketer, aka spammer, so this could potentially force mail providers to 
accept their spam.


 
-Original message-
From:Ralph Seichter via mailop 
Sent:Mon 08-03-2020 06:23 pm
Subject:Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The 
Spamhaus Project
To:mailop@mailop.org; 
* Brandon Long via mailop:


  "Founded in 1998, Spamhaus is based in Geneva, Switzerland, and
  Andorra la Vella, Andorra [...]"

>From what I understand, DatabaseUSA's "win" therefore means zip.

 
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Brian Toresdahl via mailop]

Whether or not they were, the Court considered Spamhaus served:

> At the first hearing on March 12, 2020, an issue arose on whether the
> plaintiff had properly served the
> defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. The plaintiff was
> granted leave to submit a brief on the
> issue. See Filing No. 28, Brief. The plaintiff has shown that it has
> complied with the Hague Convention
> and personally served a representative authorized to accept service of
> process in London. Id. To the
> extent that the Court has an affirmative obligation to make a finding that
> the defendant was served
> consistent with the Hague Convention before entering default judgment, the
> Court is satisfied that defendant
> Spamhaus was properly served


Based on previous cases referenced in Anne's link, Spamhaus does not always
reply to defamation cases. In the past, their non-reply and losing by
default has not caused them to pay damages. So maybe it's a winning a
strategy, if they're even aware of the cases.

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 4:23 PM Ralph Seichter via mailop 
wrote:

> * Brandon Long via mailop:
>
> > default judgment, Spamhaus is not a US organization or wasn't properly
> > served or whatever.
>
> Looks like it. https://www.spamhaus.org/organization/ states:
>
>   "Founded in 1998, Spamhaus is based in Geneva, Switzerland, and
>   Andorra la Vella, Andorra [...]"
>
> From what I understand, DatabaseUSA's "win" therefore means zip.
>
> -Ralph
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>


-- 

Brian Toresdahl

Product Management

brian.toresd...@nextroll.com 
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Ralph Seichter via mailop]

* Brandon Long via mailop:

> default judgment, Spamhaus is not a US organization or wasn't properly
> served or whatever.

Looks like it. https://www.spamhaus.org/organization/ states:

  "Founded in 1998, Spamhaus is based in Geneva, Switzerland, and
  Andorra la Vella, Andorra [...]"

From what I understand, DatabaseUSA's "win" therefore means zip.

-Ralph

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

Following up on my own post, it was a default judgement (we just posted the 
memorandum here:

https://www.theinternetpatrol.com/databaseusa-wins-case-against-spamhaus-in-matter-of-databaseusa-v-spamhaus-in-federal-court/

..and will be adding our own commentary shortly).

DatabaseUSA has been given 30 days to determine and account for monetary 
damages and file that with the court.

Anne

> On Aug 3, 2020, at 4:46 PM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.  
> wrote:
> 
> This is disturbing, although I don't know any of the back story.  Is there 
> anything of which anybody is aware that would somehow change how concerning 
> this is?
> 
> --
> 
> DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project
> 
> DatabaseUSA, a provider of data and email marketing services, has won a 
> victory over The Spamhaus Project.
> 
> A federal court found that Spamhaus defamed the company and interfered with 
> its business relations by “wrongfully listing DatabaseUSA.com on Spamhaus’s 
> domain block list from 2017 to the present.” 
> 
> DatabaseUSA suffered “damage to its reputation, a loss of customers, and loss 
> of potential revenue as a result of Spamhaus’s defamation and tortious 
> interference,” wrote Senior U.S. District Judge Joseph F. Bataillon in an 
> opinion on file with the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. 
> 
> https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/354343/databaseusa-wins-case-against-the-spamhaus-project.html
> 
> --
> 
> Anne
> 


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Brandon Long via mailop]

https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ned-8_19-cv-00423/context

default judgment, Spamhaus is not a US organization or wasn't properly
served or whatever.

Brandon

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 3:49 PM Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:

> This is disturbing, although I don't know any of the back story.  Is there
> anything of which anybody is aware that would somehow change how concerning
> this is?
>
> --
>
> DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project
>
> DatabaseUSA, a provider of data and email marketing services, has won a
> victory over The Spamhaus Project.
>
> A federal court found that Spamhaus defamed the company and interfered
> with its business relations by “wrongfully listing DatabaseUSA.com on
> Spamhaus’s domain block list from 2017 to the present.”
>
> DatabaseUSA suffered “damage to its reputation, a loss of customers, and
> loss of potential revenue as a result of Spamhaus’s defamation and tortious
> interference,” wrote Senior U.S. District Judge Joseph F. Bataillon in an
> opinion on file with the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska.
>
>
> https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/354343/databaseusa-wins-case-against-the-spamhaus-project.html
>
> --
>
> Anne
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

[Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop]

This is disturbing, although I don't know any of the back story.  Is there 
anything of which anybody is aware that would somehow change how concerning 
this is?

--

DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

DatabaseUSA, a provider of data and email marketing services, has won a victory 
over The Spamhaus Project.

A federal court found that Spamhaus defamed the company and interfered with its 
business relations by “wrongfully listing DatabaseUSA.com on Spamhaus’s domain 
block list from 2017 to the present.” 

DatabaseUSA suffered “damage to its reputation, a loss of customers, and loss 
of potential revenue as a result of Spamhaus’s defamation and tortious 
interference,” wrote Senior U.S. District Judge Joseph F. Bataillon in an 
opinion on file with the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. 

https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/354343/databaseusa-wins-case-against-the-spamhaus-project.html

--

Anne


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop