On Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 02:33:01AM -0400, Cris Daniluk wrote:
> There are no current court cases. There is, however, strong legal basis. I
> sell content to a customer which I deliver via email. You cut my route to my
> customer who has an email account with you. That prevents us from fulfilling
> our end of the deal between us and our customer. They paid us money, we
> didn't deliver. If you will all remember, Network Solutions' lawyers were in
> a similar situation when they were threatened with a blacklist for their
> high volume of spam. They made this very same argument. That never saw a
> court room, but then again they aren't blacklisted are they?
>
> >The real question is, "are you a lawyer?" If you're not, then you really
> >have no business speaking about the law in any forum.
>
> Are you? Is Sam? Are any of us? No. My point is that. I do have legal
> background in this subject area though, as it is intimately involved with my
> job.
I'm not speaking about the law. I'm just asking you to qualify your own
statements. I normally refrain from such discussions unless I'm making
claims that I've researched and am ready to stand behind.
> >By the way, I noticed that you responded to Sam's message, but you failed
> to
> >respond to Jim Lippard's posts which had a much more specific objection to
> >your viewpoint, with a relevant quoted source. Is there a reason for this?
>
> Mr. Lippards points are completely irrelevant. He's citing a bill that
> doesn't exist. Moreover, if it would suit the fancy of those of you who are
> legal evangalists, I can bring in a list of court cases in which actual
> statutes were cited, where entire sections of user agreements like what
> we're discussing were thrown out as unreasonable. I don't have any desire to
> sift through legal cases to prove a point, so I'd prefer you look it up
> yourself if you don't believe me.
In general, it is desirable for someone who is arguing a point to cite
relevant sources, and not argue based (apparently) solely upon his own
opinion. This is even more desirable in discussions where the people
involved are uninformed, and/or do not trust the other side to give accurate
information.
In any event, my opinion is that anyone who tries to sue an ISP for refusing
to accept mail from them will fail miserably.
--Adam
