<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga-abuse] Spams
Greetings,
FYI: I noted massive arrival (starting 11 May) of this message to DNSO
listadmin account, tens (hundred ?) bounces.
Then several complains like the attached.
Elisabeth
--
> From bounce-joerg=dietrich.net@nf.abuse.net Sat May 12 01:18 MET 2001
> X-Comment: forwarded via abuse.net e-mail/usenet abuse reporting service
> X-Comment: to domain(s) dnso.org
> Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 01:19:09 +0200
> From: Joerg Dietrich <joerg@dietrich.net>
> Message-Id: <200105112319.BAA13004@leviathan.bkw.stw-bonn.de>
> To: mail.rescuethenet.org@abuse.net
> Cc: dnso.org@abuse.net
> Subject: complaint: Stop the U.S. Dept. of Commerce from turning the Internet into a private monopoly
>
> Please advise this user to discontinue sending unsolicited commercial or
> broadcast mail (spam) to my e-mail address. My site must pay to receive
> and store them.In addition, I'm not interested in "Stop the U.S. Dept. of
> Commerce from turning the Internet into a private monopoly" at all.
>
>
> --------forwarded message--------
> >From rescue@rescuethenet.org Fri May 11 21:57:27 2001
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by leviathan.bkw.stw-bonn.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA12634
> for <joerg@localhost>; Fri, 11 May 2001 21:57:27 +0200
> Received: from mailin.uni-bonn.de [131.220.14.186]
> by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.5.0)
> for joerg@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 11 May 2001 21:57:27 +0200 (CEST)
> Received: from mail.rescuethenet.org (mail.rescuethenet.org [63.251.22.2])
> by f1node03.rhrz.uni-bonn.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA52648;
> Fri, 11 May 2001 21:48:05 +0200
> Received: from mail.speedus.com (mail.rescuethenet.org [63.251.22.2])
> by mail.rescuethenet.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f4BJm4c08804;
> Fri, 11 May 2001 15:48:04 -0400 (EDT)
> Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:48:04 -0400 (EDT)
> Message-Id: <200105111948.f4BJm4c08804@mail.rescuethenet.org>
> Bcc:
> Subject: Stop the U.S. Dept. of Commerce from turning the Internet into a private monopoly
> Content-Type: text/html
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> From: "Rescue the Net" <rescue@rescuethenet.org>
> X-Mailer: Mail::Mailer[v1.21] Net::SMTP[v2.15]
>
> <head>
> <title></title>
> </head>
> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0">
> <tr>
>
> <td width="400">
> <div align="center"><font size="4"><b>Stop the U.S. Dept. of Commerce from turning the Internet into a private monopoly</b></font></div>
> <p>
> This Monday, May 14, the U.S. Department of Commerce will decide whether a $12 billion public company, VeriSign, Inc. (owner
> of Network Solutions) will get to continue its stranglehold on the registering of Internet dot-com and dot-net addresses. VeriSign, which has enjoyed this monopoly for almost 10 years, had previously signed a contract to allow competition in May 2
> 001, but now they are trying to sneak through a new sweetheart deal that will let them keep their monopoly.
> <p>
> What could this mean to you?
> <p>
> <ul>
> <li>VeriSign will control the issuance and connectivity of all your Internet addresses.
> <li>VeriSign will be able to charge you whatever they like for your domain name, for the duration of their contract.
> <li>Only VeriSign will have total control over both domain registrations and the official domain registry.
> </ul>
> <p>
> <div align="center"><b>KEEP THE INTERNET FREE AND COMPETITIVE!</b></div>
> <p>
> University of Miami Internet Law Professor Michael Froomkin recently wrote that the pending contract that gives VeriSign this dangerous monopoly is, at best, a violation of several federal acts, at worst flat-out unconstitutional.
> <p>
> <div align="center"><b>TAKE ACTION NOW!</b></div>
> <p>
> <a href="mailto:DEvans@doc.gov?cc=confirmation@rescuethenet.org&subject=Department of Commerce&body=Dear Mr. Secretary%0A%0A
> I am outraged by the recent decision of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to support an exclu
> sive agreement with VeriSign, Inc. I strongly urge you to require that VeriSign, Inc. comply with their November 1999 contra
> ct to give up their exclusive control over Internet Top Level Domains (TLD's). The proposed exclusive agreement with VeriSi
> gn, Inc. will give a Monopoly over Internet TLD's and provide no benefit to the public, to taxpayers, or to the Internet.%0
> A%0AThank you">If you are outraged by this pointless and dangerous giveaway of an international resource and public utility, you can help stop this juggernaut by sending an e-mail to Commerce Secretary Donald Evans (DEvans@doc.gov) - CLICK HERE</a>.
> <p> <p>
> <b>Additional Information on This Topic</b>:<br>
> On March 28, 2001 the Names Council, which is responsible for the management of the consensus building process for the Domain Name Supporting Organization of ICANN (DNSO), proposed a consensus policy that resoundingly rejected the new VeriSign agreement. Despite the Names Council's recommendations, ICANN's board gave its approval to the new agreement anyway. You can read more about this outrageous conduct by clicking the link below to the official Names Council Resolution:<br>
> <a href="http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010328.NC-resolution-VeriSign-agreement.html">http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010328.NC-resolution-VeriSign-agreement.html</a>
> <p>
> <p>
> Please forward this email to everyone that you know and ask that they join in this cause.</td>
>
> </tr>
> </table>
> </body>
> </html>
> -----end of forwarded message-----
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|