On 07 October 2006 12:02 Steve Linford wrote: While it's OK to discuss the issue of a U.S. court ordering ICANN to suspend domains of foreign organizations, please would NANOG refrain from threads making legal assumptions based on this particular case or comments otherwise giving the spammers ideas on how to get better orders from U.S. courts. IMHO at this point the subject is off-topic, especially given the way some members of this forum continually seek to give unqaulified legal advice. Yes, the FINAL ruling will presumably have legal impications for both spamhaus and ISP's who use their lists, BUT, until all litigation in this case is settled, speculation and comment will NOT help. Pesonally speaking I know which I would prefer.. To see Spamahaus continue its effective and much needed work in helping to limit the impact of major spam sources. Barry. Director Euhosts.net http://www.euhosts.net *************************************************************************** This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please accept our apologies; please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting it. Thank you for your co-operation. Please check for viruses before accessing this email and any attachments. Except as required by law, we shall not be responsible for any damage, loss or liability of any kind suffered in connection with this email and any attachments, or which may result from reliance on the contents of this email and any attachments. ***************************************************************************

Here's an excerpt from the blog entry: "Instead of badmouthing the judge, what I would imagine is far more productive are letters from ISPs around the world attesting to the importance of Spamhaus as an organization and emphasizing how it is the individual ISP, not Spamhaus, making the affirmative choice to stop e360s messages from entering your servers and your property." The author also says: "Maybe counsel for one of the larger ISPs would be willing to act as a clearinghouse and file the letters, en masse, with the court." I hope folks take these comments to heart. I posted my own experience to the blog. I encourage others to do so. Thomas Gadi Evron wrote:

This is a really good perspective on the subject, from an Illinois bar lawyer: http://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/664

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Gadi Evron wrote:

...

Information about this court ruling can be found on Spamhaus.s web site, here: http://www.spamhaus.org/archive/legal/e360/kocoras_order_6_10.pdf

Apparently, at this stage, it is only a proposed ruling. But I am no lawyer.

Gadi.