Lawsuit threat against RBL users
James D. Wilson
netsurf at sersol.com
Sat Dec 5 03:29:25 UTC 1998
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
You have made this argument time and time again but have yet to
provide citations of court cases where this has been decided and
upheld. There are multiple cases out there which validate the right
of a provider to block mail services from whomever they want.
Saying something is so is one thing, providing cases where the legal
system has made final decisions incl. after appeals is another.
Prove that your interpretation of the law has been placed before a
judge/jury and been held up under appeal. Otherwise qualify your
statements as your interpretation of the law and your speculation as
to how it would really hold up in court.
James D. Wilson
- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog at merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog at merit.edu]On Behalf Of
Sent: Friday, December 04, 1998 7:26 AM
To: Scott Lampert; John Leong; sdeath at ackphft.matsu.alaska.edu
Cc: nanog at merit.edu
Subject: Re: Lawsuit threat against RBL users
At 11:53 PM 12/3/1998 -0500, Scott Lampert wrote:
> I don't know about where you live but here in BellSouth land you can
>call the phone company and block outgoing 900 number calls from your
Correct: YOU can ask to have things blocked on YOUR line. The phone
company (or ISP) can't do that without YOUR permission. But if (say a
CLEC) offers phone services without any 900 services, they have your
permission when you sign up.
Likewise, YOU can use the RBL to block YOUR mail, and your ISP can use
RBL if you give them permission. Which you do for example (according
Attorney somewhere), if their service definition includes blocking.
The ethics of the RBL and its ability to coerce people and
arbitrarily notwithstanding, its existance is probably not illegal.
However, that does not mean that it can't be used to illegally block
by people that don't have permission to block.
The idea promulgated by some that a network operator can do whatever
feel like with "their equipment" is plainly wrong. There are laws
govern how that equipment can be used by its owners. The people who
otherwise seem to be falling into the kook category, so I don't see
point in arguing further.
'Szechuan Death' brings up some good ethical and moral points about
RBL. ORBS is even more arbitrary and unethical. But I'm not sure this
any operational importance.
Hasn't the operational value of this discussion been exhausted?
Plain Aviation, Inc dean at av8.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.5.5 for non-commercial use <http://www.nai.com>
Comment: All Spammers Are Thieves - Jail Them Now
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the NANOG