[29780] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RBL-type BGP service for known rogue networks?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Fri Jul 7 00:13:16 2000
Message-Id: <200007070211.e672BjS19562@black-ice.cc.vt.edu>
To: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 06 Jul 2000 20:09:26 EDT."
<39651FB6.A3F28AF4@NorthShoreTechnologies.net>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_486714620P";
micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 22:11:43 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_486714620P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 20:09:26 EDT, Steve Sobol said:
> The problem is, although judges are usually pretty good at
> making the right decision, there's no guarantee that if this
> issue went to trial, MAPS would win.
It was once explained to me, totally off the record, by <you know who
you are>, that the biggest legal issue was that although MAPS just provides
data, and the providers use that data to make decisions, there was a legal
question of whether that constituted "conspiracy to engage in restraint of
trade" against the sites listed.
The problem is, of course, that the *combination* of MAPS and a provider
*is* engaged in a conspiracy to restrain the spammers... ;)
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Operating Systems Analyst
Virginia Tech
--==_Exmh_486714620P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.2
Comment: Exmh version 2.2 06/16/2000
iQA/AwUBOWU8XnAt5Vm009ewEQITTgCdFYvIy0FAhXSbX41esa69qS+sAPsAoLmc
uru9mW9dPXpbK5DfuuSPLNqO
=Kgb/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_486714620P--
