Not sure a Judge would grant such an injunction, but that might be the spammers next move.

It was a default judgment. Basically, if you don’t show up to defend yourself, the judge will find against you. In other words, it proves nothing, because it wasn’t a trial. I understand the intricacies of US law can be lost on foreigners. I just wanted to point out that this was very far from the victory e360 Insight claimed.

Additionally, the lawsuit was invalid, as that court does not have jurisdiction over Spamhaus, which is a UK company. In other words, it should have been thrown out of court before it got this far.

It’s a very expensive piece of paper, that won’t do a thing against Spamhaus, in other words.

The manager of a popular blacklist used to block spam was hit with a multimillion-dollar judgment on Wednesday but the order may not be enforceable.

The US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has ordered Spamhaus to pay $11,715,000 in damages to e360insight and its chief, David Linhardt, who had sued the anti-spam organisation earlier this year over illegal blacklisting.

Hope, soon will be more lawsuits like this one. Society must pay more attention to antispamm problem.

Vasily,
Do you know what a terrorist is at all?
Yeah, I know. If you harming others in an organized manner.

Vasily

Ok now you writing why you don’t like the group you call “anti spammers” and accuse them of just doing it for the money. But what exactly is an “anti spammer” then in your opinion?

[who really is responsible for block listing]
Sorry, lame excuse.

I didn’t excuse myself for anything in case you haven’t noticed. I made you aware of the people behind the block listings that impact your connectivity and that your swearing at “anti spammers” is pointless for that matter. Why on earth should anyone block you unless there’s a reason for it?

She glorified Bluesecurity and other terrorist’s organizations in one of the previous posts. Bluesecurity famous for their DDOS attacks on spammer’s websites.

Do you know what a terrorist is at all? Or a DDoS attack? Have you ever cared to read what Bluesecurity actually did? Not anyone was convinced by them (including me). Just do a Google search on Bluesecurity and you’ll notice some critical voices too.

And yes - they kill a lot of fair domains along with spammer’s. I know people whose fair business was ruined by such organizations.

Who “killed” whom? Blue Security? Terrorists? Organisations? Your drivel doesn’t exactly make any sense. Perhaps you should first wipe off the froth from your mouth, calm down and start again. I’m not affiliated with any organisation and in general not a friend of radical measures, so there would be interest for a dialogue from my site. But unfortunately it seems you don’t want to talk but just yell at the first person that comes across your way.

If you are support terrorists - you are terrorists too. Is it clear enough?

Oh boy… There can be many reasons for people to support terrorists without being ones themselves. But what for heaven’s sake have terrorists to do with the subject which was about “anti spammers”? You’re so convinced of being right and have no arguments to back up your claims? Could it be that you just haven’t got the faintest idea what you’re talking about?

Vasily

I want to tell you about some spam sites. Every time I search technorati, I find some splogs that are all similar names and they link to junk domains full of links and nothing else. They are made by machine I am sure. Can you email me?

Anti’s as Ann Elisabeth and others are no more than political mercenaries. They just doing business, making money - exactly like spammers.

This is nonsense, because “antispammers” (whoever this may be, since you didn’t provide a definition), have no means to prevent you from communicating with other people.

Sorry, lame excuse.

She was responsible for such a thing?

Yes. She glorified Bluesecurity and other terrorist’s organizations in one of the previous posts. Bluesecurity famous for their DDOS attacks on spammer’s websites. And yes - they kill a lot of fair domains along with spammer’s. I know people whose fair business was ruined by such organizations. If you are support terrorists - you are terrorists too. Is it clear enough?

that your ISP has a serious abuse problem.

Bullshit. My ISP is very big and very respected.

I’ve just noticed I forgot to add my definition of “anti spammer”, so here it is:

Someone who dedicates some time to track down spam operations and report them to the ISPs or hosting companies responsible and provides resources other people may or may not use for reducing the spamload on their servers/inboxes. This implies, that “Anti spammers” are by no means something like a police squad, let alone a bunch of social workers for the poorest. In most cases they’re responsible administrators who publicly publish the results of the work they needed to do anyway.

By protecting pathetic poor people who can’t solve their problems you antispammers act like a communists. Communism killed (and continue killing) many millions of people. And how much people killed by spammers?

What do you define as antispammers? Can you please elaborate, so those affected know what group they belong to? Without a definition it makes little to no sense to discuss this aspect of your critics.

You conclude that people who you define as “antispammers” protect pathetic poor people who can’t solve their problems themselves act like Communists. This behaviour, however, is by no means exclusive for communism, but something most civilisations have implemented to various degrees. Therefore your assertion, that people who do this (like Communists amongst many many other people) would automatically kill people like Communists is as absurd as concluding because one murderer has black hair and brown eyes, anyone else with black hair and brown eyes would be killing people too.

But every week I have to spent a lot of time to fight with antispammers who have blocked my IPs so I can’t send a messages to particular people or something else they invented to add another troubles to fair users.

This is nonsense, because “antispammers” (whoever this may be, since you didn’t provide a definition), have no means to prevent you from communicating with other people. What you see is the decision of administrators not to accept packages from your network. Usually this is because the ISP who provides your connectivity is ignorant to complaints and there are a lot of troublemakers that can’t be blocked more specifically. So instead of cursing the “antispammers” or “communists” you should rather turn to your ISP and convince them to deal with abuse complaints.

Blocklists, which administrators use to ease their work, are only suggestions based on abuse spotted from their. It’s up to the users of these lists to adjust them or whitelist people who reside inside of a bad block. By no means have the maintainers of these lists any authority to enforce the usage, but the fact that a lot of administrators use them indicates, that they’re addressing problems other people have seen.

Spamhuntress, however, doesn’t provide any blacklists nor has she the authority to force people into blocking your communication. Therefore you can’t blame her for your crippled connectivity.

Antispammers and spammers are actually the same - you are parasiting on fair web-masters. But the anti’s activities are much more destructive.

Can you please elaborate how “antispammers” (provided a definition exists) are affecting you as a webmaster and in what way they are more desctructive? I for one have yet to see that what I consider as “antispam” (see definition above) is as much a bandwidth and resource drain as spam is (both web and email spam). But then again you may have a different definition, so that my observation doesn’t apply here.

You are almost killed the e-mail and you are going to kill ability to comment blog posts wich is the corner-stone of the contemporary web.

I agree, spammers did almost kill email and may be able to kill interactive websites as well. But that’s related to the way the Internet and Blogging once started, as small group of people who didn’t thought about abusing the system. These implementation issues become apparent once the amount of users reaches a critical mass and at least one of them starts looking for holes to exploit.

Ann Elisabeth, come to the mirror, imagine yourself wearing prisoner’s uniform and repeat your own words: “DDOS is a CRIME”.

She was responsible for such a thing? When and where? Have you got any evidence that points to her?

Also say to your reflection: “When you block entire diapason of IPs you block a lot of fair people.

It’s not her nor anyone else making suggestions about blocking addresses, who is to blame. It’s a mere suggestion and people don’t have to use it they don’t want to. The fact, however, that it does affect your communication channels, proves that many people find it useful and that your ISP has a serious abuse problem. Administrators and webmasters don’t have to accept packages from your network if they see no advantage in it.

Vasily