The truth about the Spamhaus and commercialism of ideological Steve
Linford

Letter sent to several lawyers from Switzerland and the United Kingdom

I am a lawyer and editor of a well known Legal Book in Brazil.

We publicize our product via e-mail, among other media. There is a
mechanism for removing the e-mail address from our lists, as
recommended by international law, simply by sending us an email with
the title "remove".

Yet there is, in London, an entity called the "Spamhaus Project" Ltd.
located at 26 York Street London W1U 6PZ United Kingdoma, which has
registered my company as a " spamer ", thereby blocking our email
messages on servers using its database.

In the U.S. this organization was ordered to pay more than eleven
million dollars for "e360insight" for similar conduct.

Spamhaus (www.spamhaus.org) states in their website, in order to avoid
prosecution, that it does not intercept people's e-mail and simply
provides its database to third parties. They charge up to $ 16.800,00
a year for this service, which means that not only Spamhaus offends my
name but also labels my product in an unauthorized way.

lsroland wrote:

So much like a lawyer. So many words to say "I am a spammer".

And most 12-step programs wold ask you to say your name after that.

On Tue, 6 May 2008 16:03:08 -0700 (PDT), lsroland
gmail.com> wrote:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Strike one.

Strike two.

Strike three....you're out!

lsroland wrote:

Maybe you'd want to cite your name and the book to which you refer?
Might help a bit in busting the bullshit factor.

Me, I'm a well-respected church official in a Texas alien death cult. I
have paperwork to prove it.

In other words, you send spam email to unwilling recipients who never
heard of nor care about you or your book and got yourself listed with
Spamhaus. Sounds like a fair cop. That you ask people to mail you to be
removed from your lists is no defense whatsoever.

On Tue, 6 May 2008 16:03:08 -0700 (PDT), lsroland
gmail.com> wrote:

A lawyer to stupid to look up the case and find out e360insight got
nothing? Must be a good and accurate book.

Oh wait you're a spammer. Which shows you're probably to dumb to look
up a case and instead site quotes from a biased source. A source
written by a spammer who doesn't want to admit he's getting his ass
handed to him all over the legal system.

--
Cary

lsroland gmail.com> writes:

So - are you saying that opinions are "unauthorized" in your country?

On Tue, 6 May 2008 16:03:08 -0700 (PDT), lsroland wrote:

Oh nooooooooo! Another "Cartooney"!

The problem is, there should be a mechanism in place to be added to your
list. One which requires a positive assertion by the party whose email
address is being added that they did, in fact, request to be added. Without
which assent, the email address will not be added. Without such a mechanism
in place, you may will be (however unintentionally) a spammer.

On Tue, 6 May 2008 16:03:08 -0700 (PDT), lsroland
gmail.com> wrote:

Gee, I get the feeling that Lindtard is sending up something here.
Perhaps he needs a feeding frenzy of "Antis" for some reason.

In any case, Brazil is already in router ACLs, so SpamHaus doesn't
have to advise me to reject the emails. I already do on my own, due
entirely because of my own experience that shows that the vast
majority of traffic from Brazil is entirely unwelcome, be it email,
DNS, HTTP, or what have you.

Sounds like a good slogan:

If it's from LATNIC, it's GOT to be blocked.

lsroland wrote:

So lost, so confused, such a lack of comprehension, ...

I recommend talking to _your_ mail server admin,
If they are any good at their job,
I'm certain they could impart much wisdom;
You'll likely come to understand you know (knew) too
little about what you've written.

On Tue, 06 May 2008 20:50:38 -0500, Buss Error yahoo.com>
wrote:

snip

Er: BRNIC. But LATNIC works too.