<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Spamhaus et al et al et al
- To: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [ga] Spamhaus et al et al et al
- From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 14:41:52 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=wnzlTKivvGmUta8sgTKDOviT8BoeX1QezKIKEvHHA2WzjfXODPOychntlvENq5yHzOhPkY6sK17R8aBY/3ON/gLSSVDhOBbsjES9Lm68dPYoazyjc4nIUOPxQCFh7j0QkA60h5RPRzhbU/M8sWrVRZQFJhS7F29ysyDPx00E8c4= ;
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Declan does his usual good job on this article;
http://news.com.com/2061-10796_3-6124737.html
I don't know that Tucows or PIR can delete the name either based upon ICANNs logic. If it ain't in the contract it can't be done - hum di di dum. I don't think that would quite wash with a District Judge. I never got what would be the basis for injucntive relief anyway. Seems like any and all alleged injury can be remedied by monetary relief.
And besides that isn't spamhaus selling it services for a fee based on choice. Seems like the plaintiff is whining, but spamhaus is equally lackluster in its' defense.
e
---------------------------------
Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|