Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 21:55:10 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: alk@pobox.com Cc: brett@lariat.org, gary@eyelab.psy.msu.edu, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups Message-ID: <199909242155.OAA26546@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <14315.59636.927570.497528@avalon.east> from "Anthony Kimball" at Sep 24, 99 04:15:26 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> : The DUL merely provides a list that they > : can elect to use. > > It's the addition of my host to the DUL that I think might be > actionable if it causes damages. What if I publish a list > of the IPs of "known communists" or "race traitors", and you > block me? And what if I'm not a communist? > > : Therefore, I doubt that there are grounds for > : any sort of lawsuit. > > That's what would be fun to see:-) > > I'm human, so I hate spam, naturlich, but I think this blacklisting > is *destroying* the value of the Internet (while spam only gnaws at > it), so I would definitely vote to award damages, if I was on a jury. Any blacklisting, like the RBL and/or the DUL, is potentially actionable under current "Restraint of Trade" laws and under the RICO "Anti-Racketeering" statutes. There also may be a cause of action under the Sherman Antitrust Act, and under the First Ammendment (as "prior restraint" by systems which have not yet been abused by an abuser who has found himself placed on a list). The RBL is less of a problem in this regard, since it has a more stringent requirement for involuntary entry, which could be argued as defacto, rather than dejure, voluntary entry into the list. This is a shaky legal construct, and it still begs the question of "prior restraint", even if it dodges the other issues. The DUL is on much shakier ground, since many ISPs dialup address assignment blocks have been entered involuntarily, without an offense by the particular address being placed in the list. [E.g. contrary to Brett's Claim, it is _not_ an "opt-in" list.] Sane ISPs _do not like_ the dialup list; it holds them responsible for their customer's content via the threat of the RBL for the ISP, and via the requirement that they act as a relay for their customer's email. As a relay, without common carrier status, the ISP can be held legally responsible for the content of traffic coming over their wires, since their sesrver systems participated in the traffic. As we have seen in Australia, creating chokepoints with ergonomic government-finger-shaped finger-grooves is a Bad Thing(tm). Philosophically, I support the RBL, and I detest the DUL. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199909242155.OAA26546>