ICANN says can't comply with Spamhaus court order

Says has neither the ability nor authority to do so

[jtara]

The announcement, however, leaves two doors open:

Even if ICANN were properly brought before the court in this matter, which ICANN has not been, ICANN cannot comply with any order requiring it to suspend or place a client hold on Spamhaus.org or any specific domain name because ICANN does not have either the ability or the authority to do so. Only the Internet registrar with whom the registrant has a contractual relationship - and in certain instances the Internet registry - can suspend an individual domain name.

[icann.org...]

MOD Edit: Added link to previous discussion. [webmasterworld.com...]

[edited by: engine at 7:17 pm (utc) on Oct. 12, 2006]

[Webwork]

Am I right in thinking that the plaintiff filed this as an "in rem" (against the thing ~ domain) action?

I'm waiting to see the plaintiff's lawyer attempt to enforce a money judgment against local assets, such as the domain name. "Sheriff, I want you to head on down to PIR and serve this levy on the domain name Spamhaus.org."

As Judy Tenuta would say "It could happen."*

What that would accomplish is likely "not much" as the enterprise might simply be re-launched under a new URL, on a new server, in a more friendly . . or problematic . . nation. www.Spamhouse.elbonia might be a place to regroup, if Spamhous' servers are mud proof. ;)

* Yes, Judy has invaded my mind lately. Must be a Vegas effect. Gotta go pay homage to the love goddess.

[edited by: Webwork at 9:25 pm (utc) on Oct. 11, 2006]

[davezan]

And note the 2 key words: contractual relationship.

If that plaintiff's lawyer's really smart, he should already get the hint. And AFAIK it's not even an in rem action, just someone trying to sue the pants out of spamhaus and exploring every avenue possible.

[leadegroot]

Its a strange request - it probably only demonstrates 360's net ignorance. But I guess the whole case does that.

360 filed a motion alleging that Spamhaus failed to comply with the Court's previous order and asked the court to suspend www.spamhaus.org, until Spamhaus complies with the Court's previous order.

Its like sueing a shop and ordering its lease to be revoked until it pays up - the leased premises are irrelevent to the business; In the unlikely event that the domain name was revoked, spamhaus would just move on.

[wildbest]

To avoid such probabilities in future, are we supposed to move all our domain names out of US-based domain registrars?

[davezan]

To avoid such probabilities in future, are we supposed to move all our domain names out of US-based domain registrars?

What you're asking makes things more challenging. But that won't do squat if the Registry of that extension is in the US.

[wildbest]

davezan -- what you say is court order should be addressed to the .org registry instead of asking ICANN or TUCOWS? If they do that, spamhaus.org domain name has all the chances of being suspended?

[Lexur]

To avoid such probabilities in future, are we supposed to move all our domain names out of US-based domain registrars?

It's a really interesting question.

Can I lose all my domains registered in the USA because a smart lawyer realize that he can file a lawsuit for any imaginable reason and expect an easy victory in court if I don't send my own lawyer to the USA?

[webdoctor]

spamhaus would just move on.

Spamhaus already own spamhaus.org.uk - perhaps they're already making plans...

[webdoctor]

(...)it's a really interesting question. Can I lose all my domains registered in the USA

In the worst case scenario you could potentially lose all domains where the REGISTRY is in the USA - so you're only safe with a country-code TLD (.de, .uk, .fr, and so on)

[davezan]

davezan -- what you say is court order should be addressed to the .org registry instead of asking ICANN or TUCOWS? If they do that, spamhaus.org domain name has all the chances of being suspended?

Tucows at the very least, though PIR's a better bet.

And sure the .org domain name has all the chances of being suspended. Will it be suspended is another story. ;)

[wmuser]

ICANN cant do anything to precent spam,thats defenetly the worng way to go

[webdoctor]

IMHO it simply isn't ICANN's job to deal with spam - it's for local lawmakers and local law-enforcement.

I tend to agree with Spamhaus when they say:

Spam is an issue about consent, not content. Whether the UBE message is an advert, a scam, porn, a begging letter or an offer of a free lunch, the content is irrelevant - if the message was sent unsolicited and in bulk then the message is spam.

Spam is not a sub-set of UBE, it is not "UBE that is also a scam or that doesn't contain an unsubscribe link", all email sent unsolicited and in bulk is Spam.

This distinction is important because legislators spend inordinate amounts of time attempting to regulate the content of spam messages, and in doing so come up against free speech issues, without realizing that the spam issue is solely about the delivery method.

It isn't that hard to introduce suitable legislation [theregister.co.uk] (with suitable penalties).

If your particular country hasn't done this yet, why not contact your elected representative(s) and ask them why not?

[wildbest]

And sure the .org domain name has all the chances of being suspended. Will it be suspended is another story.

This would be nothing less than act of terror!