On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 09:47:28AM -0700, Robin Felix wrote: > The better question is whether the blacklister has civil liability to > anyone in the email chain: mail user, mail server, intermediate carrier, > mail recipient, or blaclistee, such that they could successfully win a > lawsuit against the blacklister and collect damages against them. So > far, that's a "no." To date, the legal consensus is that no mail server > is forced to use a blacklist. It's a voluntary action by those who run > mail hosts, and while they _may_ have a duty to their mail users to > provide reliable service, they have no duty to folks listed on the > blacklist. The blacklist, by its existence alone, causes no harm. The situation is more complex than this, unfortunately. If even one organization subscribes to a blacklist, then there exists an argument that an ISP, in general, can provide better email service by acquiescing to the demands of the blacklister. It is a network effect, plain and simple. Does the ISP in this case really have a choice about whether to pay the blacklister? I'd say no. Geoff
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature