Meanwhile, back at the Digital Divide Ranch
On an Ops list we're discussing a surprising civil case in North Dakota. In what follows "zone transfer" means "copy".
A operates a Unsolicited Bulk Email (UBE) business (you may use "spammer" if you like), and organic to the business of ... spamming ... operates one or more Domain Name System (DNS) servers, one of which is authoritative for a domain and the associated zone which A uses to originate streams of UBE.B (You may use "anti-spam vigilantee" if you like) requests a zone transfer for the associated zone from a DNS server under the control of A. The DNS server under the control of A is configured to allow zone transfers unconditionally. This is the default configuration of this particular DNS server.
A then sues B for a privacy cause of action.
Ruling at trial: As B is neither a "researcher", nor is a zone transfer of A's zone necessary for the operation of A's zone, B's conduct is not privileged, and A's privacy claim prevails. B is held liable for civil damages.
There's a lot of nuances that are discussed by, what amounts to the experts on the subject, and its not my intent to recite, or discuss the merits, of each.
What I remind wampum's readers is that there really still is very little "law of the internet", and lawlessness begins, like the rot in fish, at the head. I don't mean ICANN, I mean FISA and the employees of the United States who assert their conduct is not criminal because they conduct it, but that arbitrary conduct by others is criminal because they assert that it is so.
That's why Chris Dodd's position on FISA is a matter of life, or civil death, to everyone who uses a can tied to a string that may or may not be tied to one or more other cans. The rotten Cappo del Pesce crowd are doing whatever the hell they want with all the string, weaving nooses for any they think would look better walking in the air.
