funsec mailing list archives
Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court?
From: "Dude VanWinkle" <dudevanwinkle () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 18:30:11 -0400
On 9/18/06, Drsolly <drsollyp () drsolly com> wrote:
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Dude VanWinkle wrote: > On 9/18/06, Drsolly <drsollyp () drsolly com> wrote: > > > I'm not sure how women don't have equal protection under the law, but > > > that's aside the point. In reality, when the USSC generally discusses > > > companies as having "rights" they are or should be referring to the > > > stock holders' rights - not the corporate entity's. Our political > > > > I have a feeling that under US law, a corporation is a legal "person", > > there was some railraod case that set this precedent. > > Yep, they have most of the rights of a person, but no body with which > to put in jail when they break the law :-( Yes, that's a drawback. But if a corporation breaks the law, surely at least one of the corporate officers has broken the law?
There may be a hefty fine for the company to pay, their stock may even drop. But before the Enron/Tyco/Worldcom triple header, I had never seen a top level executive in an american company go to prison, even though they steal millions of dollars (Have any since? Seriously, I just stopped caring at that point, and dont know if any were put in prison). Getting back to the thread though: Vixie said: "last but not least, i want steve linford to be welcome at NANOG and IETF meetings held in the US (and even those held in indiana, if ever.) having him taken from the airport in handcuffs would be a real buzz-killer for me." Is that a possibility? Did Spamhaus break the law by not being in the courts jurisdiction? -JP _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- RE: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court?, (continued)
- RE: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Gary Funck (Sep 16)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Dude VanWinkle (Sep 16)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Brian Loe (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Paul Vixie (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Brian Loe (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Paul Vixie (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Brian Loe (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Drsolly (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Dude VanWinkle (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Drsolly (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Dude VanWinkle (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Dude VanWinkle (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Blue Boar (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Blue Boar (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Dude VanWinkle (Sep 19)
- RE: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Gary Funck (Sep 16)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Nick FitzGerald (Sep 18)
- Re: Spamhaus Ignores U.S. Court? Dude VanWinkle (Sep 18)