February 28, 2007 at 00:15Spamhaus Project Curls Against Lawsuits
Defining spam is very difficult. It’s one thing if a Nigerian fraud scheme is spread through mass mailing or fake medicines are advertised. Here, no court will side with the spammer. But what if a certain non-profit organization sends out millions of leaflets urging them to donate in favor of the starving or for another good purpose? If these are blacklisted, then scandal cannot be avoided. So it goes. Forbes magazine published an article on lawsuits against which the non-profit British organization Spamhaus Project- the most famous company that compiles and distributes black lists of spammers. These lists are used by many Internet providers and even government organizations to filter garbage in mail traffic.
Spamhaus Project understands spam as any mass mailing which is carried out without the prior consent of the recipients. The problem is that US law contains a different definition of spam. There is no ban on bulk unsolicited mailing. The main thing is that the recipient should be able to unsubscribe. Marketers who engage in mass mailings categorically deny their spamming nature. In November 2003, mass mailings from E360insig were blacklisted. Three years later, the Spamhaus Project received a lawsuit for $ 25 million. The plaintiff claimed that 4 million users did not receive their “business correspondence” because of blocking mailing lists, resulting in direct losses of the company exceeded $ 3 million.
The lawsuit was filed in June 2006. Oddly enough, but the American court listened to the plaintiff's arguments and after several months of proceedings ordered the Spamhaus Project to compensate for the damage to the injured marketers. However, the British organization refused to do this, citing the fact that it is outside the jurisdiction of the American court.
This is not the first lawsuit filed by marketers against the Spamhaus Project. According to the head of this organization, Steve Linford (Steve Linford), they have already spent more than $ 40,000 to successfully defend against such claims in the United States.
At the same time, the level of spam in email traffic sets new records. In 2006, its volume doubled, so now spam accounts for more than 94% of all email traffic on the Internet, according to Postini.
However, American courts not only accept claims from spammers, but also successfully punish them with fines. For example, a simple American, Mark Mumma, launched a noisy anti-spam campaign: he specially opened more than fifty mailboxes to which he receives 8,000 spam messages per day, after which he filed a lawsuit against spammers. To date, Mamma has already won about $ 7,500 in court (spending more than $ 50,000 on legal costs) and has launched Sueaspammer.com , which reports on his success.
True, because of his activities, Mark is now in the balance of personal bankruptcy. Once, having received 11 unsolicited letters from a local tour operator, he cursed at their forum and called merchants “spammers," for which he immediately received a counterclaim for protecting his goodwill for $ 3.8 million. Mamma lost the case in court and filed an appeal, the process goes on so far, however, the enterprising American does not give up and opened another site, “Two Bucks a Month,” through which he asks sympathizers for financial assistance.
Spamhaus Project understands spam as any mass mailing which is carried out without the prior consent of the recipients. The problem is that US law contains a different definition of spam. There is no ban on bulk unsolicited mailing. The main thing is that the recipient should be able to unsubscribe. Marketers who engage in mass mailings categorically deny their spamming nature. In November 2003, mass mailings from E360insig were blacklisted. Three years later, the Spamhaus Project received a lawsuit for $ 25 million. The plaintiff claimed that 4 million users did not receive their “business correspondence” because of blocking mailing lists, resulting in direct losses of the company exceeded $ 3 million.
The lawsuit was filed in June 2006. Oddly enough, but the American court listened to the plaintiff's arguments and after several months of proceedings ordered the Spamhaus Project to compensate for the damage to the injured marketers. However, the British organization refused to do this, citing the fact that it is outside the jurisdiction of the American court.
This is not the first lawsuit filed by marketers against the Spamhaus Project. According to the head of this organization, Steve Linford (Steve Linford), they have already spent more than $ 40,000 to successfully defend against such claims in the United States.
At the same time, the level of spam in email traffic sets new records. In 2006, its volume doubled, so now spam accounts for more than 94% of all email traffic on the Internet, according to Postini.
However, American courts not only accept claims from spammers, but also successfully punish them with fines. For example, a simple American, Mark Mumma, launched a noisy anti-spam campaign: he specially opened more than fifty mailboxes to which he receives 8,000 spam messages per day, after which he filed a lawsuit against spammers. To date, Mamma has already won about $ 7,500 in court (spending more than $ 50,000 on legal costs) and has launched Sueaspammer.com , which reports on his success.
True, because of his activities, Mark is now in the balance of personal bankruptcy. Once, having received 11 unsolicited letters from a local tour operator, he cursed at their forum and called merchants “spammers," for which he immediately received a counterclaim for protecting his goodwill for $ 3.8 million. Mamma lost the case in court and filed an appeal, the process goes on so far, however, the enterprising American does not give up and opened another site, “Two Bucks a Month,” through which he asks sympathizers for financial assistance.