On Wednesday, October 11, 2006, 1:16:18 AM, hamann.w wrote: hwtod> As a non-american, I can see this as a "vote with your feet" hwtod> case .... stop buying US products
I'm squarely on the side of Spamhaus and sensitive to these issues, as I myself have been sued by a ROKSO-listed spa^H^H^H electronic marketing entrepreneur, in a foreign jurisdiction (California) and had to move to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, which I was successful in doing. Blaming the court, the U.S., or the U.S. legal system is completely unwarranted. From what I have seen from news articles, public discussion, and the documents filed in the case itself, Spamhaus did not challenge personal jurisdiction. Spamhaus, after removing the case from state court to federal court and filing an answer, deliberately allowed a default judgment for damages and a permanent injunction to be taken against it, apparently under the theory that any such judgment would be unenforceable anyway. I'm not an expert on German law, but I suspect that if some spammer sued me in Germany, I'd have to take some affirmative steps to deal with that, lest I end up with a German judgment rendered against me. Blame the plaintiffs, blame what some might consider to be less-than-stellar legal advice given Spamhaus, but don't blame the court for following the law. -- Best regards, Robert Braver [EMAIL PROTECTED]
