SPAM, RE: Internic and there lame response

Roeland M.J. Meyer rmeyer at
Sun Jul 12 18:45:57 UTC 1998

The whole thing is currently in massive upheaval. Yes, MHSC is involved, as
are many others. NSI contracts are set to expire this September and a new
governing organization is being formed, enabled by recent USG White Paper.
The plot's afoot, as they say.

In the process, the SPAMMERS may yet get cooked. At least, get caught
between two large and unyielding surfaces.<grin> This also applies to
domain-name pirates. No, SPAM is not a specific issue, but false data is,
as well as whom is responsible for its retention.

see <>

At 08:21 PM 7/8/98 -0400, Dean Robb wrote:
>At 19:22 7/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>Here is Internic's lame response regarding some of the domains that they
>>seem to support spam houses.. Some of the domains are clearly spam houses..
>>and I complained about one.. being registered to the same person and is
>>being used to spam the heck out of people.. here is there lame response
>>back.. seems Like internic is not gonna be of any help.
>InterNIC is NEVER any help.  IMO, they are the single biggest blight on the
>Internet, mainly because they have so much power and choose to just sit
>back and collect $$ instead of use their power to do anything even remotely
>>The InterNIC, like all Internet users, is impacted by individuals
>>who send out "spam" (bulk e-mailing) on the network. However,
>>Network Solutions is responsible for the administration of the
>>name space and not for policing its content or use.
>>Removal of domain names belonging to users who send unsolicited
>>e-mail would make it harder, not easier, to track and filter
>>unsolicited e-mail from their domain. Several free software programs
>>allow users to filter incoming traffic from a specified domain. If
>>users sending unsolicited e-mail are forced to register new domain
>>names it also becomes harder for Internet users to track the origin
>>of the unsolicited e-mail.
>Straw man.  "If we enforce the laws, the criminals will just get sneakier".  
>>Although we are concerned about the validity of information in the
>>WHOIS database, it is the responsibility of the domain holder to
>>maintain current information. Invalid phone numbers or non-working
>>e-mail addresses of contacts is not a valid reason for cancellation
>>of a domain name. Domain names are only deleted at the request of
>>the registrant or via our billing cycle if payment is not received.
>Except, of course, that the Registration Agreement that a domain registrant
>agrees to in order to get a domain says that the domain can be deleted for
>false information.  IF InterNIC TRULY gave a damn about WhoIs, they'd
>enforce their contract.  This is just a massive lie.  
>Can someone with acess to a lawyer comfortable in Internet law PLEASE get
>an opinion on whether an "attractive nuisance" or other civil suit against
>InterNIC would work? 
>>Many Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have policies regarding bulk
>>emails. You may wish to contact the ISP of the user who sent you the
>>unsolicited e-mail.
>Incredibly two-faced response.  How do you determine the user's ISP?  Check
>WhoIs.  But...OOOPPSS!...the information in WhoIs is phoney, and we don't
>do anything about that.  Sorry, guess you're just screwed.
>Oh, but give us money!  Our $16 million dollar quarterly profits just
>aren't enough.  Why, we can't even afford to write a script that will only
>permit numbers in numberic fields of our registration templates!
>What do spammers and nails have in common?  They're both intended for
>Dean Robb
>On-site computer services
>(757) 495-EASY [3279]


Roeland M.J. Meyer, ISOC (InterNIC RM993) 
e-mail: <mailto:rmeyer at>rmeyer at
Internet phone:
Personal web pages: <>
Company web-site: <>
SecureMail from MHSC.NET is coming soon!  

More information about the NANOG mailing list