Quote:
Originally Posted by David
I am not wanting to argue theog. I am just wanting to point out how the law (in the United States) protects those who wish to spam. The US 'Can-Spam' act gives spammers the full protection of the law (which is the real message of this thread)
The company in question were merely protecting their constitutional rights to spam (and had a good chance of winning this case) which is why sued Spamhaus in the first place.
|
True... but spamhaus contends they were working illegally, and not following the law set in the USA. That is why I don't understand the argument. Is it your argument that e360insight was not spamming?
I'm not on the "spamhaus bus" by any means... I've been on the tail-end of their system when they think you are a spammer. Oh... not fun.
xmailer, you are evil... I almost fell out my chair, holding my gut... I needed that.
