I'm sure the judge was well aware of the judgement in Hansen v Denckla where the court ruled that a transaction within the state can allows the state to excercise jurisdiction to a company situated outside of that state, and the precedent that if a defendant makes a genereal appearance in the court, then he submits to jurisdiction of the court.
But seriously - the iPod seemed lame compared to Creative's nomad when it first came out. Yet it suceeded. Why? What does it have that all the mp3 players that cane out before and cost less lack?
Care to explain how a "on list" response doesn't end up in a block?
Not all Spamhaus users use only Spamhaus to block spam. Many other use it as just part of a blocking system. Some spam systems may attempt to resend if it's blocked. Some email systems may cache the result of the request.
Also, note the weasel words "More than 90% of of all email is now spam". This is not the same as saying "Spamhaus blocks 90% of all email traffic", yet the conclusion drawn from this assumes that it is.
I said "exaggerated". Not "non-existent". It doesn't cost as much as people make out.
And would you be neutral about spam that you personally receive if it took you 10 seconds per month, and required virtually no computer resources? Does the time itself really mean that much to you? Are all of your decisions in life based on a purely financial incentive?
It was a commentary on spamhaus' legal argument so far. Not an opinion on how things should work.
1. Spamhaus requested jurisdiction be moved to a federal court in this (PDF) document, thereby accepting jurisdiction of the court.
2. The Illinois District Court is a general trial court of the US federal court system.
3. Their ciurrent position - after losing horribly through inept legal arguments - seems to be that they're nice people.
First while "sending" email is free, the cost of actual delivery (internet backbone) and storage (server admins) are handled by other parties.
The financial costs of dealing with spam are exaggerated. We're assuming that the time taken 'dealing' with spam would otherwise be spent doing something productive.
The offence caused by spam isn't becuase it costs money. It's simply the rudeness of someone violating ones perceived territory in order to sell you something.
Spamhaus has no idea how many spams it actually blocks. No idea about what other blocking mechanisms are used by its users, and only an estimate about how much email is spam.
I'd imagine that "success in the real world" implies high earning and/otr high aademic qualifications. And there probably is a correlation between this and a high IQ.
It is also true that some people are extremely intelligent by most tests, but have a low IQ. Of course, BMI is similar. Power lifters have an abnormally high BMI, but that weight is all muscle, so could not possibly be considered obese. But it doesn't matter when you have a large enough sample. These anomolies are statisically insignificant.
It depends a little on the organisation. In some cases (typically the smaller ones), there will be a technically minded IT guy running this who doesn't experience the problems himself but would appreciate the feedback, and make appropriate adjustments to the router.
Point of order. Libel and slander are different at least from a legal point of view. Libel is written, slander is verbal. Basically, the difference with slander is that you also have to prove that what was said was said. (I believe if it's broadcast speech, it would be libel)
Mainly because it was only a provisional licence at the time,
Curious that this didn't cause a problem itself. When I was learning to drive, I was surprised that passing the driving test was considered so important for opening a bank account...
The plaintiff said that the court had jurisdiction. The defendant said that the county court had no jurisdiction and that therefore it was under the jurisdiction of the district court. If both sides state that it's under the courts jurisdiction, then what is the court meant to say?
Plaintiff said they're not a spammer. Unfortunately the way the whole balance of probabilities works is that unless the defendant says "They are a spammer", there is more evidence that they are not.
Defendant has specifically asked for District court jurisdiction
Defendant has published his IP address as a spammer
Plaintiff is not a spammer
This has caused financial harm to plaintiff.
Based on balance of probabilities, why would any judge rule against this?
Tucows will probably be a little more savvy in dealing with the complaint. Something along the lines of "We cannot comply with any order by this court because doing so would breach Canadian Contract law". Rather than Spamhaus's "We want to change the jurisdiction to the district court". "We do not accept the juriosdiction that we have just accepted".
e360 after winning a lawsuit want a legal judgement to force ICANN to suspend a domain.
ICANN points out that it can't suspend a domain except for a TLD. This is not their responsibility, and they do not have direct control of the servers for the.org domain.
The registrar for the.org domain may well have control over the domain, so they may well be the next stop.
It tends not to work like that. The legal system is an adversarial process.
So e360's lawyers would argue that Spamhaus was violating the court order by doing this. It would then be up to the court to decide whether the order meant what e360's lawyers argue it means, or what Spamhaus say it means. It depends on whether a "reasonable man" would think that this violates the order based on the arguments provided.
This is largely because Tannenbaum was critical of Linux, and Linus was defending his creation. Just because he disagreed about the importance of certain fundamentals doesn't mean he didn't believe that Tanenbaum's opinion was worthless. Quite the opposite. If he didn't respect Tanenbaum's opinion, he wouldn't have responded.
And it's a well known fact that Linux was heavily influenced by Tanenbaum's operating systems book.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure the judge was well aware of the judgement in Hansen v Denckla where the court ruled that a transaction within the state can allows the state to excercise jurisdiction to a company situated outside of that state, and the precedent that if a defendant makes a genereal appearance in the court, then he submits to jurisdiction of the court.
This is lame. Go for the Nomad instead.
But seriously - the iPod seemed lame compared to Creative's nomad when it first came out. Yet it suceeded. Why? What does it have that all the mp3 players that cane out before and cost less lack?
Care to explain how a "on list" response doesn't end up in a block?
Not all Spamhaus users use only Spamhaus to block spam. Many other use it as just part of a blocking system. Some spam systems may attempt to resend if it's blocked. Some email systems may cache the result of the request.
Also, note the weasel words "More than 90% of of all email is now spam". This is not the same as saying "Spamhaus blocks 90% of all email traffic", yet the conclusion drawn from this assumes that it is.
I said "exaggerated". Not "non-existent". It doesn't cost as much as people make out.
And would you be neutral about spam that you personally receive if it took you 10 seconds per month, and required virtually no computer resources? Does the time itself really mean that much to you? Are all of your decisions in life based on a purely financial incentive?
It was a commentary on spamhaus' legal argument so far. Not an opinion on how things should work.
1. Spamhaus requested jurisdiction be moved to a federal court in this (PDF) document, thereby accepting jurisdiction of the court.
2. The Illinois District Court is a general trial court of the US federal court system.
3. Their ciurrent position - after losing horribly through inept legal arguments - seems to be that they're nice people.
First while "sending" email is free, the cost of actual delivery (internet backbone) and storage (server admins) are handled by other parties.
The financial costs of dealing with spam are exaggerated. We're assuming that the time taken 'dealing' with spam would otherwise be spent doing something productive.
The offence caused by spam isn't becuase it costs money. It's simply the rudeness of someone violating ones perceived territory in order to sell you something.
Spamhaus has no idea how many spams it actually blocks. No idea about what other blocking mechanisms are used by its users, and only an estimate about how much email is spam.
I'd imagine that "success in the real world" implies high earning and/otr high aademic qualifications. And there probably is a correlation between this and a high IQ.
It is also true that some people are extremely intelligent by most tests, but have a low IQ. Of course, BMI is similar. Power lifters have an abnormally high BMI, but that weight is all muscle, so could not possibly be considered obese. But it doesn't matter when you have a large enough sample. These anomolies are statisically insignificant.
Just do something like this Aleksey Vayner.
(Yeah. I know its old news by now. Still makes melaugh)
TERRORISM!
I win.
It depends a little on the organisation. In some cases (typically the smaller ones), there will be a technically minded IT guy running this who doesn't experience the problems himself but would appreciate the feedback, and make appropriate adjustments to the router.
Don't know about everyone else, but I quite like having a totally separate debugger/help screen.
Are less violent than the bible.
When do we ban that? It doesn't even have an age rating on it!
Sooo... Does this mean it can be copied, but not played on a PC... Very useful copy protection, I'm sure...
Point of order. Libel and slander are different at least from a legal point of view. Libel is written, slander is verbal. Basically, the difference with slander is that you also have to prove that what was said was said. (I believe if it's broadcast speech, it would be libel)
Mainly because it was only a provisional licence at the time,
Curious that this didn't cause a problem itself. When I was learning to drive, I was surprised that passing the driving test was considered so important for opening a bank account...
The plaintiff said that the court had jurisdiction. The defendant said that the county court had no jurisdiction and that therefore it was under the jurisdiction of the district court. If both sides state that it's under the courts jurisdiction, then what is the court meant to say?
Plaintiff said they're not a spammer. Unfortunately the way the whole balance of probabilities works is that unless the defendant says "They are a spammer", there is more evidence that they are not.
The claim was:
Defendant has specifically asked for District court jurisdiction
Defendant has published his IP address as a spammer
Plaintiff is not a spammer
This has caused financial harm to plaintiff.
Based on balance of probabilities, why would any judge rule against this?
Tucows will probably be a little more savvy in dealing with the complaint. Something along the lines of "We cannot comply with any order by this court because doing so would breach Canadian Contract law". Rather than Spamhaus's "We want to change the jurisdiction to the district court". "We do not accept the juriosdiction that we have just accepted".
The judge made the right decision.
It's an adversarial system. If there's no defendant, the plaintiff wins. Blame the law. Not the judge.
e360 after winning a lawsuit want a legal judgement to force ICANN to suspend a domain.
.org domain.
.org domain may well have control over the domain, so they may well be the next stop.
ICANN points out that it can't suspend a domain except for a TLD. This is not their responsibility, and they do not have direct control of the servers for the
The registrar for the
It tends not to work like that. The legal system is an adversarial process.
So e360's lawyers would argue that Spamhaus was violating the court order by doing this. It would then be up to the court to decide whether the order meant what e360's lawyers argue it means, or what Spamhaus say it means. It depends on whether a "reasonable man" would think that this violates the order based on the arguments provided.
This is largely because Tannenbaum was critical of Linux, and Linus was defending his creation. Just because he disagreed about the importance of certain fundamentals doesn't mean he didn't believe that Tanenbaum's opinion was worthless. Quite the opposite. If he didn't respect Tanenbaum's opinion, he wouldn't have responded.
And it's a well known fact that Linux was heavily influenced by Tanenbaum's operating systems book.
But who would be the top programmers to interview? A lot of the famous names are (a) dead, and (b) never actually wrote a line of code in their lives.