>> >[previous stuff snipped]
>> > Loren
>>
>> Loren is correct. And Jeff and I have had this conversation many times.
>Jeff
>> would rather not risk the FPs by doing it. I can see his point. But I
>agree
>> with Loren that we have IPs that are pure spam.
>
>One tiny quibble. For each machine blocked there is perhaps one whole
>internal site that is blocked as well. But it means that site is
>throwing spam out to the universe and the company doing it or the
>individual doing it should stop the practice or take back ownership
>of their machine. THEY might consider themselves "innocent victims."
>But it's the only way if they have one bad egg in their company or
>an infected computer. Either way they really have no solid claim
>on any innocence they may profess.
>
>{^_^}
>
This is just one difference between SURBLs and some other lists
(e.g. the SBL). The people *do* in some cases have a valid claim of
innocence - even most of the worst spams hosting offender have at least
a few legitimate customers, who did not perform adequate due-diligence
before signing up/committing to using a "spammer" or "spam friendly"
service; And unfortunately, for cases like this, ignorance is a valid
defence (though a good lawyer would argue that for medium to large
businesses, such behavior is negligent).
In at least a few cases in with I have been personally involved,
contacting a large company will cause them to move away and fast. For
example, Ebuyer (from whom I semi-regulaly purchase equipment), contracted
with a Brazilian porno outfit to host and mail on their behalf - one
telephone call and within 5 minutes I was connected to a VP - 36 hours
later they were elsewhere, and now operate their own site from the home
office in England. (They were blacklisted by IP on the SBL, SPEWS and
quite a few other lists for two days and had no idea until it was explained
to them and a non-technical corporate officer was led through checking
things like openrbl.org, Spamhaus, etc.)
Bad business practices do not always translate to guilt; Either
(IANAL) legally or IMNSHO morally; Now, if they had stayed there after
being told and the situation explained, they would have lost at least
one customer, who also probably would have made sure they got blacklisted
in many more places:) Instead, they convinced me that the were a well
meaning company, who made a mistake and acted very quickly to remedy
the situation. For all those similar companies, with whom I do not do
business or even recognize their names, I'm sure that many are in the
same boat.
Paul Shupak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
