On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 01:53:55AM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
What Vix is doing probably isn't illegal by itself, though it might possibly violate trademark or the new copyright law when domain names are used. I don't think he is likely to get sued. However, using the RBL could be illegal if one isn't a party to the email being blocked. The legislative history of 18 USC 2511 indicates it was specifically meant to apply to email. I wish I knew that last year.
Not applicable. The people who lose connectivity to the places Vix blackholes _specifically request_ that behavior -- indeed, they _must_ turn the feed on by hand. Their customers might have cause of action against _them_; _no one_ has cause for action against Paul.
For example, if Above.net blocked mail betweeen company X and an MSN customer, and they are not an agent of company X or the MSN customer, they are probably in trouble by 2511. Of course, one of the parties to the email has to figure out where the mail was blocked, and notice that the blocker isn't a party to the email. Then they have to know that there is a federal law that prohibits that. And finally, they have to seek enforcement.
I think that logic's faulty, too, Dean. The interim provider certainly has right of control over it's own equipment; if the provider feels that spam and such are impeding it's ability to provide such service, it is certainly within it's rights to fix the problem. If it's customers don't like this, it's certainly not impossible for it to move to another provider. Cheers, -- jr 'If you need a lawyer, hire one' a -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "Two words: Darth Doogie." -- Jason Colby, Tampa Bay, Florida on alt.fan.heinlein +1 813 790 7592 Managing Editor, Top Of The Key sports e-zine ------------ http://www.totk.com