p2pnet - rss feed: Spamhaus ignores US court
p2pnet.net News:- UK anti-spam outfit Spamhaus is ignoring a US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ruling ordering it to fork out $11,715,000 in damages to e360insight and e360insight’s David Linhardt.
The court also told Spamhaus, “to remove Linhardt’s ROKSO record and to cease blocking Linhardt’s spam,” it says.
But the Illinois ruling, “shows U.S. courts can be bamboozled by spammers with ease,” says Spamhaus, pointing out the suit went to default judgement when Spamhaus didn’t accept US jurisdiction and, therefore, didn’t defend it.
“Default judgments obtained in U.S. County, State or Federal courts have no validity in the United Kingdom and can not be enforced under the British legal system,” it says, going on:
“A Plaintiff seeking to have such an order enforced must re-file the case in a British court of law and prove jurisdiction, as well as the small matter of proving the rest of the case.”
Meanwhile, Spamhaus is listing Linhardt’s company E360 Insight on its SBL spam blocklist “as usual,” and, states the site, because spamming is illegal in the United Kingdom, “an Illinois court ordering a British organization to stop blocking incoming Illinois spam in Britain goes contrary to U.K. law which orders all spammers to cease sending spam in the first place”.
Also See:
Spamhaus - To David Linhardt aka e360 Insight LLC, September 14,
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
September 15th, 2006 at 3:08 pm
It’s very arrogant of the US to give ORDERS (OMG!) to institutions out of their range of jurisdiction.
September 15th, 2006 at 4:37 pm
and yet not uncommon
September 15th, 2006 at 5:13 pm
The Spamhaus.org web site seems to be completely down right now. Hmmmm, interesting…. Did UK authorities take it down?
September 15th, 2006 at 6:03 pm
Funny,
I am not having any problem accessing it .. hm hmmmm
http://www.spamhaus.org/
September 15th, 2006 at 10:24 pm
No problems accessing it at all, here.
Why would “UK authorities” do that, anyway? Because of some minor court’s order in another country?
September 16th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
“Default judgments obtained in U.S. County, State or Federal courts have no validity in the United Kingdom and can not be enforced under the British legal system,”
Which raises the question, did the judge not know that? After all, an unenforceable sentence is nothing more than a waste of time and people’s legal expenses money.
That aside, we musk ask why do the courts allow sentences to go unenforced?
In my case, we have a final sentence of #300,000 plus attorney fees of about $80,000 against RIAA member record company Sonolux. Sonolux made 16 and distributed them in the USA from their Florida office, all without our authorization (we own the copyright to songs). With interests, Sonolux owes us about $500,000, and the owner is a billionaire who singlehandedly employs 27,000 person, in Colombia,
Sonolux skipped town but still sell records, including the infringing ones through many USA dealers in the Internet.
See this page:
http://www.bestprices.com/cgi-bin/vlink/musiclabels/cds-by-recordlabel-Sonolux.html
Here we ask the 1/2 million $ question: Why the amrican courts allow their sentences to go blatanly unenforced? Is it all a game playing circus where the not connected (we are not members of RIAA) always loose.
Of course, it is more incredible considering that kids are sued for sharing a (unproven) few music files by RIAA members, who in turn are the worst pirates there are, proven in our case agaisnt RIAA’s Sonolux and in our yet ongoing lawsuit against RIAA’s Sony for producing 24 cd’s with our songs, all without authorization.
More details in my web page.
Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com
September 18th, 2006 at 8:58 am
Site’s definately down:
ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved
The following error was encountered:
* Connection Failed
The system returned:
(61) Connection refused
The remote host or network may be down. Please try the request again.
Generated Mon, 18 Sep 2006 08:53:53 GMT by www.spamhaus.org (squid/2.5.STABLE12)