Re: Lessons Learned from the MPAA's use of DCMA

[Michal Zalewski <lcamtuf () coredump cx>]

On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Brooke, O'neil (EXP) wrote:

> I.e. Send a letter to the network provider stating: If you do not stop
> this subscriber from taking these illegal actions (cite the law that
> states spamming, DOS'ing, etc. are illegal) then we will hold you (the
> network provider) financially accountable for our losses.

A provider that fails to cooperate after getting a standard abuse report
from you will most likely not care about any kind of letters from any
entity that does not have an army of well paid lawyers at its service - in
which case, they'd most likely take "immediate preventive actions" even
upon a completely unconfirmed or impossible to verify report.

Otherwise, the typical (if any) response from a pro-spam ISP is that if
you feel the customer is breaking the law, you should sue the customer,
and we'll happily cooperate with the court. At worst, they'd claim they
couldn't process and verify your claim, no biggie. This is pretty much
bogus, but they do feel safe in doing that, in almost every country.

-- 
_____________________________________________________
Michal Zalewski [lcamtuf () bos bindview com] [security]
[http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx] <=-=> bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
=-=> Did you know that clones never use mirrors? <=-=
          http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/photo/