It is, in fact, one year today that I started blogging. My first real post came on August 30, 2007… discussing the e360 v. Spamhaus case. And look, here I am, a year later still discussing the e360 v. Spamhaus case. The end of that first post said: Overall I think the ruling is generally what we could have expected. I’m quite pleased that the court affirmed that Spamhaus may legally list...
It has been one of those weeks here and there have been a couple legal things that have come up that I have not had the time to blog about. One is a post over on Eric Goldman’s blog by Ethan Ackerman discussing the Jeremy Jaynes case. It is quite an info heavy post, but well worth a read. In addition to not having the time to fully read Ethan’s post and understand the legal subtleties...
A few days ago I was reading the attempt by e360 and Dave Linhardt to force Comcast to accept his mail and to stop people posting in the newsgroup news.admin.net-abuse.email from claiming he is a spammer. The bit that pops out at me in this complaint of his, is the fact that he believes that by complying with the minimal standards of the CAN-SPAM act, he is not spamming. The problem with this...
I received a comment this morning on my post about e360 v. Spamhaus, which I think brings up a point that deserves a post of it’s own. Skinny says: If spamhaus can create their own list of what Spam is or isn’t, Then what is to stop us applying this rule in the real world. A joy rider can carry a mission statement declaring that in his terms car theft is ok (a over the top compression but...
RSS - Posts