marc at ena.com
Fri Feb 19 10:47:43 CST 2010
On Feb 18, 2010, at 2:25 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 18/02/2010 10:40, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>> They seem to be doing that a lot of late. They also contacted my
>> employer and demanded $100k/yr(?) for having a "Use Spamhaus RBL" in our
> I sympathise. It's very frustrating when you try to deal with these
> anti-spam outfits in a reasonable way and you're met with almost completely
> arbitrary b/s.
What's arbitrary about free for non-commerical use, everyone else pays? When you include it in a commercial product, yes, you should have to pay for it. If you're making money by reselling or providing access to the Spamhaus lists, you should have to pay for it. There's a lot of work that goes into it (I'm sure Michelle would agree) and they have very specific criteria under which they will allow free use and under which they will not. If you don't like it, make your own lists. If you *really* don't like it, make your own lists, and provide a free public infrastructure to support billions of requests a day.
More information about the NANOG