“Spamhaus” Blacklists “e360insight” And Refuses To Withdraw Statement

Spamhaus, founded by Steve Linford in 1998 aims to trace e-mail spammers and other spam-related activity. Recently by the order of a district court in USA, Spamhaus has been asked to pay the fine of $11,715,000 to "e360insight". This was because Spamhaus illegally blacklisted e360insight , which in turn sued the company. The court has ordered Spamhaus not to obstruct, change, interrupt or delay e-mail delivered by e360insight and it must also apologize admitting that e360insight is not a spamming organization.

Reacting to the ruling, chief of e360insight, David Linhardt said it confirms that Sapmhaus.org is a fanatical, vigilante firm that works in the United States with obtrusive disregard for US law.

Bart Lothen, an attorney in Chicago representing e360insight remarked that their clients do not send spam mails but send legitimate e-mails to people who choose to be part of a list that agrees to accept e-mail announcements.

However, Spamhaus is not worried and considers the court's judgment as invalid. According to a statement on its website, UK does not enforce under the British legal system any judgment obtained in the US county, state or federal courts. Since spamming in Britain is illegal, UK law prohibits all spamming activity in the first place. Therefore an Illinois court ordering a British firm to stop incoming Illinois spam in Britain is irrelevant.

While the company has asked e360insight to seek judgment in UK, it is still firm not to remove the name of e360insight from its blacklist and refuses to take back that it is a spamming company. Spamhaus maintains a list of spam sources, which it distributes free of cost to help administrators keep their mailboxes uncluttered.

In support of Spamhaus, Barracuda Networks' CEO, Dean Drako said that Spamhaus was doing the right thing.

Of the total e-mail, spam mails account for around 75 percent. Spamhaus blacklist is recognized among the top blacklists and is widely accepted. Drako mentions that spammers have to battle with blacklists as it damages their business. Since a spamming company's revenue depends on the amount of spam read, a blacklisted spammer has less of its spam through. Therefore the lawsuit cannot mean anything substantial.

Related article: “Loopholes did not cause online banking thefts”: ICBC

» SPAMfighter News - 9/22/2006