Lord help us if Spamhaus is taken offline! This seems like the old chestnut: "The lunatics are running the insane asylum." If a spammer can order ICANN to shutdown an anti-spam service, isn't that a little like a drug dealer convincing a judge that the police should be shut down because they are trying to stop drugs on the street? ICANN is not the responsible party in this case. The registrar, Tucows, is the organization that has a contract with the end user and should be the only party involved in any enforcement orders and compliance.A spammer shutting down an anti-spam service is enough of a travesty without ICAAN being forced to operate outside its legal authority. Let's hear it for ICAAN for standing up and causing a ruckus by not knuckling under to a wrongful court order and maybe even giving energy to a proper look at enforcement in the Internet domain name arena.
ghm101Oct 12, 2006
Should'nt that be ICAAN says I Can'tha ha
anthonykuhnOct 16, 2006
Lord help us if Spamhaus is taken offline! This seems like the old chestnut: "The lunatics are running the insane asylum." If a spammer can order ICANN to shutdown an anti-spam service, isn't that a little like a drug dealer convincing a judge that the police should be shut down because they are trying to stop drugs on the street? ICANN is not the responsible party in this case. The registrar, Tucows, is the organization that has a contract with the end user and should be the only party involved in any enforcement orders and compliance.A spammer shutting down an anti-spam service is enough of a travesty without ICAAN being forced to operate outside its legal authority. Let's hear it for ICAAN for standing up and causing a ruckus by not knuckling under to a wrongful court order and maybe even giving energy to a proper look at enforcement in the Internet domain name arena.