Re: Heads up for users of spamhaus
Last I had read it wasn't an order. It was something the spammers lawyer proposed. The judge has to sign it, and hasn't yet. http://www.spamhaus.org/legal/answer.lasso?ref=3 http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/default+judgement ANYWAY - further discussion of the legal aspects of this are off topic for this list, please take them elsewhere. -R At Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:18:01 -0700, Waitman Gobble wrote: The order was to ICANN regarding the domain name. It is a curious situation though. Waitman James Turnbull wrote: Matt Sergeant wrote: http://wordtothewise.com/Spamhaus_ICANN_order.html If you're using sbl-xbl, consider temporarily switching to cbl until this blows over. The order is essentially meaningless though isn't it? The associated judgement is unenforceable because Spamhaus isn't under the jurisdiction of US law - it's a UK entity. If Linhardt wants to stop them he is going to have to file the same case in a UK court and the laws regarding spam in the UK are considerably different. Regards James Turnbull
Heads up for users of spamhaus
http://wordtothewise.com/Spamhaus_ICANN_order.html If you're using sbl-xbl, consider temporarily switching to cbl until this blows over.
Re: Heads up for users of spamhaus
On Oct 6, 2006, at 16:09, James Turnbull wrote: The order is essentially meaningless though isn't it? The associated judgement is unenforceable because Spamhaus isn't under the jurisdiction of US law - it's a UK entity. If Linhardt wants to stop them he is going to have to file the same case in a UK court and the laws regarding spam in the UK are considerably different. The court order is for ICANN and/or Tucows to suspend or hold www.Spamhaus.org, whatever that means. - ask -- http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Heads up for users of spamhaus
On 6-Oct-06, at 7:09 PM, James Turnbull wrote: Matt Sergeant wrote: http://wordtothewise.com/Spamhaus_ICANN_order.html If you're using sbl-xbl, consider temporarily switching to cbl until this blows over. The order is essentially meaningless though isn't it? The associated judgement is unenforceable because Spamhaus isn't under the jurisdiction of US law - it's a UK entity. If Linhardt wants to stop them he is going to have to file the same case in a UK court and the laws regarding spam in the UK are considerably different. That was indeed the prediction of the previous judgement in the same case [*], however this escalates it to ICANN and TUCOWS (who have both been contacted to ensure that nothing drastic is done). Matt. [*] http://www.spamhaus.org/legal/index.lasso
Re: Heads up for users of spamhaus
The order was to ICANN regarding the domain name. It is a curious situation though. Waitman James Turnbull wrote: Matt Sergeant wrote: http://wordtothewise.com/Spamhaus_ICANN_order.html If you're using sbl-xbl, consider temporarily switching to cbl until this blows over. The order is essentially meaningless though isn't it? The associated judgement is unenforceable because Spamhaus isn't under the jurisdiction of US law - it's a UK entity. If Linhardt wants to stop them he is going to have to file the same case in a UK court and the laws regarding spam in the UK are considerably different. Regards James Turnbull
