Cisco owns IronPort, who owns spamcop, but neither provide any money to spamcop. Spamcop used to be partially supported by CES, but they bailed. Spamhaus is a different company, and is arguably evil. --dave On 17/08/17 08:48 PM, Stewart Russell via talk wrote:
On 17 August 2017 at 19:30, David Collier-Brown via talk <talk@gtalug.org <mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> wrote:
Spamcop.net should not be compared to the extortionist sites, nor the email vendors. It's honest, and living on a shoestring.
On a shoestring? They're part of Cisco. They run an RBL, so they can still block shared servers. I still put them on the evil side.
And note that it's the _corporate email providers_ who charge money to anyone who gets reported for spamming: that's why I used that particular example.
The RBL that blocked my former employer asked for money to get a faster resolution. That's extortion. And there's a precedent for considering RBLs tortous interference: Spamhaus vs E360, which from reading Wikipedia and Spamhaus's own coverage, you'd think Spamhaus won. They lost: the $3 symbolic damages remained.
Stewart
--- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
-- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest davecb@spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain