It looks like he's left NZ and doesn't mind burning his bridges to get the story out...
[ begin Alan's e-mail ]
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:49:36 -0600 Sender: Spam Prevention Discussion List <SPA...@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM> From: Alan Brown <al...@DIGISTAR.COM> Subject: Spam, block: Telecom Corporation of NZ, spamming via a contractor - bravenewworld.co.nz
Telecom Corporation of NZ are the owners of the Xtra.co.nz domain, whose marketing department brought legal action to have their servers removed from ORBS as a spam source. As you can see, the entries were not without reason.
it should be noted that the "STATEMENT TO ALL" which I posted in June 2001 was written by Telecom's lawyers and posted under duress - while the judge was made aware that the statement contained falsehoods, I was ordered to post it anyway, or be arrested and jailed until such time as I was willing to post it.
As a result, I recommend that _all_ servers belonging to Telecom Corporation of NZ and their support companies (braveneworld.co.nz)
The original injunction obtained by Telecom Corporation of NZ and Actrix Networks Ltd was on the basis that the ORBS listings interfered with those companies' contracual obligations to deliver mail for their customers.
Yes, that's right, the ruling was essentially that receivers aren't allowed to block incoming mail using blacklists.
The injunction was obtained in secret. The first knowledge I had of the injunction's existance was when I was served with it by lawyers from KPMG.co.nz, Palmerston North.
Furthermore: As supporting testimony, statements were made to the court by kpmg.co.nz, Palmerston North about how unfair it was that their mail was being blocked - from MY OWN mailservers[1]. Similar statements were also made by Actrix networks. Their primary complaint was not being listed by ORBS, but that I was blocking them from my OWN mailservers.
[1] KPMG Palmerston North sent several faxes to my company threatening legal action unless we stopped refusing their email.
As these companies have effectively set legal precedent in NZ that receivers have to shut up and eat their spam, I strongly urge the full blocking of the mailservers and companies involved.
Off topic: Actix makes a large song and dance about being a NZ company. It came out in the court documents that they are majority owened by a USA ISP. IMO they are basically defrauding their own customers about their ownership...
I was unable to make any comment about this while in NZ without risking jail time and seizure of all my computers. I am no longer in NZ.
YELLOW PAGES(R) is a registered trademark of Telecom Corporation of NZ.
tx.co.nz is registered to bravenewworld.co.nz and is routed via Telecom Corporation of NZ's main competitor - Clear Communications. Neither bravenewworld.co.nz or Clear have responded to previous complaints on this matter.
(there is an identical message on file personalised to me at one of my own domains and to a dead friend at a domain he held several years ago.)
Return-Path: <enqu...@accessnz.co.nz> [snip internal headers] Received: from columbus.bravenewworld.co.nz (columbus.bravenewworld.co.nz [202.20.64.24]) by mail2.manawatu.net.nz (8.11.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f7R1wPu06446 for <pe...@wgtn.planet.org.nz>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:58:25 +1200 X-Remote-IP: 202.20.64.24 Received: from localhost (columbus.bravenewworld.co.nz [202.20.64.24]) by columbus.bravenewworld.co.nz (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id f7R1tmL26603 for <pe...@wgtn.planet.org.nz>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:55:48 +1200 Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:55:48 +1200 Message-Id: <200108270155.f7R1tmL26...@columbus.bravenewworld.co.nz> To: Peter Hall-Jones <pe...@wgtn.planet.org.nz> From: AccessNZ <enqu...@accessnz.co.nz> X-Mailer: Touchpoint Campaign Manager - Touchpoint Limited - http://www.touchpoint.co.nz/ Subject: Two Special Offers From AccessNZ for http://www.planet.org.nz/ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----_NextPart_000_0004_01C0257B.6FC83210"
Hi Peter
We've recently received requests from other AccessNZ members wanting to know how they can effectively promote their business online. So we're pleased to bring you these two YELLOW PAGES(R) offers that could be suitable for http://www.planet.org.nz/
1. A free subscription to YellowBiz(TM) - the YELLOW PAGES(R) email newsletter that includes great tips and practical information on increasing traffic to your web site and converting hits into sales. 2. A special package for AccessNZ members to link their web site from Internet YELLOW PAGES(R) for a low monthly fee and receive up to $750 in free banner advertising and production.
Plus, if you subscribe to YellowBiz(TM) before 28 September 2001, you could win $1000 of travel with Air New Zealand.
[snip]
YellowBiz(TM) is the FREE monthly email newsletter created by YELLOW PAGES(R) especially for New Zealand businesses. Highlighting the latest in doing business digitally, YellowBiz(TM) offers tips, trends and success stories that can really help you improve your online return on investment. You'll learn how to drive more interested traffic to your site, measure your site's performance against your competitors' and create successful online promotions. Plus, you'll be the first to take advantage of exclusive subscriber-only offers - delivered direct to your inbox.
Here's a special offer for AccessNZ listed businesses - the Internet YELLOW PAGES(R) Traffic Booster online promotional package - available for a limited time only.
For just $40 + GST per month, with no setup costs, you can have a Headline, powerful Web Site Link and Email Link on the YELLOW PAGES(R) web site. Plus, as a bonus, you'll receive $500 worth of Banner Advertising on the YELLOW PAGES(R) and WHITE PAGES(TM) web sites, and YELLOW PAGES(R) will even create a banner for you if required (worth $250). That's a total saving of $750!
Like your AccessNZ listing, the Traffic Booster package increases visibility of - and visitors to - your web site. A Web Site Link ensures your listing receives priority near the top of a search result, then a Headline differentiates your web site with a unique description.
Highlighted by a special icon, your Web Site Link encourages potential buyers to click straight through to your site. And your Email Link allows potential customers to email you at the click of a button.
Banner Advertising guarantees even greater visibility, appearing at the top of Internet YELLOW PAGES(R) and WHITE PAGES(TM) screens, enticing buyers to click directly through to your site.
[ end Alan's e-mail ] -- |I always wanted to be someone,| Tom Betz, Generalist | |but now I think I should have | Want to send me email? FIRST, READ THIS PAGE: | |been a wee bit more specific. | <http://www.panix.com/~tbetz/mailterms.shtml> | | "Fuck NANAE." -- Paul Vixie | YO! MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS HEAVILY SPAM-ARMORED! |
In article <9sevr0$36...@news.panix.com>, tb...@pobox.com wrote: >It looks like he's left NZ and doesn't mind burning his bridges to >get the story out...
[Biggus Snippus]
I know where he is. I'm trying to sell some computers so I can donate some money to him to ressurect ORBS in his new location.
I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted. Reading something like that is downright chilling. I would expect it from China. But New Zealand?
On 09 Nov 2001 00:17:42 GMT, Joe Munger <js...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid> wrote:
>I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. >We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted. >Reading something like that is downright chilling. I would expect it >from China. But New Zealand?
MAPS has gotten the same treatment. Alan's full of crap, he listed a whole ISP in "inputs/outputs" just because he had a hair across his ass. Whether any coercion was involved in the public statement he made is irrelevant, because those IP addresses *were* listed by ORBS, and they didn't match the published ORBS criteria for listing. Now he comes up with a one spam example to justify his action these many months later. Crapola.
Joe Munger <js...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid> wrote: >I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. >We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted.
We have such rights because we rejected England's repressive form of government when we broke away so decisively in 1776. Our Bill of Rights reflects in great part the fear the US Founders had of turning this country into another England.
But other countries that originated from England's colonization adventures neither sought nor obtained independence from England until much later. Further, their independence came only gradually, as their ties to England became looser and looser. Consequently, those countries developed governments as repressive and authoritarian as the government they originally knew.
In article <3BEB2075.B167E...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid>, Joe Munger <js...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid> writes:
> I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. > We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted. > Reading something like that is downright chilling. I would expect it > from China. But New Zealand?
Even after reading must of the stuff surrounding it, I'm *still* not sure exactly what's going on, but it does appear rather disturbing
Then there's the apparent (?) cozy relationship between the new Administration in D.C. and Microsoft. One *hopes* that's only a case of ideological agreement, as opposed to something more ominous.
Regards, Jim -- Jim Seymour | "Living in an email account with lots 2...@cluestick.org | of spam is like living in a community Don't use nonpar...@pandora.orbl.org | with trash in the streets," "and YES moron I am" - GNewrgray | - Gartner analyst Joyce Graff
"tre...@sirius.com.no.more" wrote: > But other countries that originated from England's colonization > adventures neither sought nor obtained independence from England until > much later. Further, their independence came only gradually, as their > ties to England became looser and looser. Consequently, those countries > developed governments as repressive and authoritarian as the government > they originally knew.
The others consisted mainly of natives. The American colonies' populaces were mostly English, with a bit of contact with some "indians" (as if they still believed they were in India). The native populations of the others could be dominated, repressed, made to wear funny clothes. The Americans (even the criminals, to a certain extent) came to America to breathe free, and had some idea how to do it. They knew how to talk to the enemies of England, get together with them and kick England's ass.
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Spammers: Don't tread on me - your spam is not allowed at my place. Fee for processing UCE, UBE, SPAM: $1000 per item, plus collection. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Quoth 2...@cluestick.org (Jim Seymour) in <tunl6lrd5ct...@corp.supernews.com>: |In article <3BEB2075.B167E...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid>, | Joe Munger <js...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid> writes: |> I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. |> We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted. |> Reading something like that is downright chilling. I would expect it |> from China. But New Zealand? | |Indeed. But you may find this... interesting: | | http://www.DSLReports.com/shownews/12440 | |Even after reading must of the stuff surrounding it, I'm *still* not |sure exactly what's going on, but it does appear rather disturbing | |Then there's the apparent (?) cozy relationship between the new |Administration in D.C. and Microsoft. One *hopes* that's only a case |of ideological agreement, as opposed to something more ominous.
-- |I always wanted to be someone,| Tom Betz, Generalist | |but now I think I should have | Want to send me email? FIRST, READ THIS PAGE: | |been a wee bit more specific. | <http://www.panix.com/~tbetz/mailterms.shtml> | | "Fuck NANAE." -- Paul Vixie | YO! MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS HEAVILY SPAM-ARMORED! |
tre...@sirius.com.no.more wrote: > We have such rights because we rejected England's repressive form of > government when we broke away so decisively in 1776. Our Bill of Rights > reflects in great part the fear the US Founders had of turning this > country into another England.
However, because the Bill of Rights is supposed to prevent our legislators from turning this country into another Soviet Union, it's gradually being superseded.
-- "I would have been happy to explain further, except you had by that point made it clear you would believe whatever you wanted to believe" -- Jamie McCarthy, <b613732a.0107031352.5d337...@posting.google.com>
> >I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. > >We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted.
> We have such rights because we rejected England's repressive form of > government when we broke away so decisively in 1776. Our Bill of Rights > reflects in great part the fear the US Founders had of turning this > country into another England.
> But other countries that originated from England's colonization > adventures neither sought nor obtained independence from England until > much later. Further, their independence came only gradually, as their > ties to England became looser and looser. Consequently, those countries > developed governments as repressive and authoritarian as the government > they originally knew.
If we can please leave aside the "my country is better than your country" for a little while.
With all the cancellation flying around, I had to go into Google to look at the original posting.
On a final note. Mr Brown claimed in the original message (nov.8/01) that according to documents filed in the court proceedings Actrix "are majority owened by a USA ISP."
------ copy ------ 2001 ANNUAL RETURN FOR ACTRIX NETWORKS LIMITED(535561)
Shareholders (as at incorporation or last annual return if any.) Number of shares 10,000 Name No. of Shares 929116 - WEST 175 MEDIA (NZ) LIMITED 6,000 Suite 4a, Reid House, 114 Alexandra Street, Hamilton 949229 - ANKOR LIMITED 4,000 Level 1, 282 Wakefield Street, Wellington
< big snip >
Are 25% or more of voting shares held by a person / body corporate ordinarily resident outside New Zealand? No ------- end copy -------
tb...@panix.com (Tom Betz) wrote in message <news:9sevr0$36r$1@news.panix.com>... > It looks like he's left NZ and doesn't mind burning his bridges to > get the story out...
> [ begin Alan's e-mail ]
> Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:49:36 -0600 > Sender: Spam Prevention Discussion List <SPA...@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM> > From: Alan Brown <al...@DIGISTAR.COM> > Subject: Spam, block: Telecom Corporation of NZ, > spamming via a contractor - bravenewworld.co.nz
> Telecom Corporation of NZ are the owners of the Xtra.co.nz domain, whose > marketing department brought legal action to have their servers removed > from ORBS as a spam source. As you can see, the entries were not without > reason.
> Then there's the apparent (?) cozy relationship between the new > Administration in D.C. and Microsoft. One *hopes* that's only a case > of ideological agreement, as opposed to something more ominous.
Even cozier is the relationship between Microsoft and MGM/UA.
I understand that they are giving Bill Gates a white Persian Cat and a Monacle and offering him a role in the next Bond Film.
Joe Munger <js...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid> wrote in message <news:3BEB2075.B167E555@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid>... > I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. > We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted. > Reading something like that is downright chilling. I would expect it > from China. But New Zealand?
I don't know if the courts in New Zealand have the authority to order a person to publish a specific public statement ostensibly from _himself_.
But I suppose that if a person settles a lawsuit or an appeal by enterring into a consent decree in which that person agrees to publish such a statement, as for example when the party winning the suit agrees to forgive payment of some of the damages in ex- change for such a statement then the maybe the court would act to enforce the consent decree it approved.
> Joe Munger <js...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid> wrote in message <news:3BEB2075.B167E555@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid>... > > I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. > > We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted. > > Reading something like that is downright chilling. I would expect it > > from China. But New Zealand?
> I don't know if the courts in New Zealand have the authority to > order a person to publish a specific public statement ostensibly > from _himself_.
The basic nature of courts--indeed--anybody is that they can do what ever they want to. Unless a higher authority tells them they may not.
If a court tells you to do something, you have three choices:
Do it. Suffer the consequences of not doing it. Appeal to a higher court (which might lead to recycling the questions, to something worse, or to escape).
> But I suppose that if a person settles a lawsuit or an appeal > by enterring into a consent decree in which that person agrees > to publish such a statement, as for example when the party winning > the suit agrees to forgive payment of some of the damages in ex- > change for such a statement then the maybe the court would act to > enforce the consent decree it approved.
If you agree to do something, you have to do it, or start a new action that might show you were under duress, that the action is not in the public interest, or is forbidden by some higher authority.
I don't know whether there is something more ominous in DOJ felching Bill Gates, but I don't take seriously most of what emerges from ZD. As to the issue with the security flaw, the Feds had no power to force him to withhold publication; rather than being frightened by their power, I am frightened by their incometence.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 Team OS/2 Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to spamt...@library.lspace.org -----------------------------------------------------------
In article <3bee7a80$1$fuzhry$mr2...@news.patriot.net>, "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamt...@library.lspace.org.invalid> writes:
> As to the issue with the security flaw, the Feds had no power to force > him to withhold publication; rather than being frightened by their > power, I am frightened by their incometence.
The Feds had the power to have a Norwegian boy arrested for something that isn't even illegal in Norway.
The combination of power and incompetence is the most frightening. Everyone who has seen a Hipflood [1] knows it is trivial to send messages over Usenet, yet CNN agreed to delay the interviews with bin Laden because they could have secret hints.
Erik Warmelink wrote: > The combination of power and incompetence is the most frightening.
This has great current relevance in the US.
> Everyone who has seen a Hipflood [1] knows it is trivial to send > messages over Usenet, yet CNN agreed to delay the interviews with > bin Laden because they could have secret hints.
Wouldn't you think the Muslim with TV would rather get his news from Al Jazeera? I'd guess that you, as a foreigner (to the US), have seen more than one example of the stupid parochialness of the US (if it doesn't happen here it doesn't happen). Add ignorance to the power/incompetence mix and you really have something scary (see my first comment).
Well, the only relevant thing I see there is that the judge increased the penalty because of making a solicitor's letter public. The term "Star Chamber" comes to mind.
> Strangely, the documents filed with the Government of New Zealand >does not confirm that claim.
Who owns the parent company?
-- ----------------------------------------------------------- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 Team OS/2 Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to spamt...@library.lspace.org -----------------------------------------------------------
In article <3BF69A69.91981...@mail.tds.net>, "brad.madison" <brad.madi...@mail.tds.net> writes:
> Erik Warmelink wrote: >> Everyone who has seen a Hipflood [1] knows it is trivial to send >> messages over Usenet, yet CNN agreed to delay the interviews with >> bin Laden because they could have secret hints.
> Wouldn't you think the Muslim with TV would rather get his news from Al > Jazeera?
I think a Muslim would like to have several independent sources of information, just like most of us.
> I'd guess that you, as a foreigner (to the US), have seen more > than one example of the stupid parochialness of the US (if it doesn't > happen here it doesn't happen).
The US is bigger than the Netherlands, when we are pariochial, it is worse. ;-)
> Add ignorance to the power/incompetence mix and you really have > something scary (see my first comment).
Free information is a good medicine for ignorance, during paranoid periods, I believe that governments like spam because it gives their subjects an incentive to approve control of information flows. Software to read e-books can put someone in jail and software to avoid email filters stays legal.
Joe Munger <js...@dfsdsssdfjk.invalid> wrote: >I had no idea New Zealand had such a tyranical, oppressive government. >We Yanks tend to take free speech and property rights for granted. >Reading something like that is downright chilling. I would expect it >from China. But New Zealand?
>J.M.
I'd just like to say that New Zealand does not have a tyranical, oppressive government... and I think that the day-to-day freedom and rights are on a world-class level... and I am not being forced to say this :)
|
