Re: Help with removing DNS shinkhole FP from Charter/Spectrum

["John R. Levine" <johnl () iecc com>]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, William Herrin wrote:
> Respectfully, you're mistaken. Look up "tortious interference."

I'm familiar with it.

But I am also familar with many cases were spammers have sued network 
operators claiming that they're falsely defamed, so the operator has to 
deliver their mail.  They have without exception lost.  If you can find 
actual cases where a court forced an operator to deliver a third party's 
traffic I would like to hear about it.*

43 USC 230(c)(A) provides extremely broad protection for "good faith" 
blocking, which means that a complaint would have to show that the 
blocking was malicious rather than merited or accidental.  In this case it 
seems probably accidental, but for all I know there might have been bad 
traffic to merit a block.

Here's one of the cases where a spammer lost:

https://jl.ly/Email/holomaxx.html
https://jl.ly/Email/holo4.html

And here's one where the judge rejected tortious interference:

https://jl.ly/Email/spamarrest.html

> My results going through the support front-door at large companies for
> oddball problems have been less than stellar. Has your experience
> truly been different?

No, it's terrible, and Spectrum is particularly bad.  I am now in month 
three of trying to get them to route a /24 to my host that belongs to one 
of my users, and their responses can be summarized as very complex 
exegeses of "duh?"

But bogus lawyer letters will just make things worse.

R's,
John

* - let's stay away for now from the Texas and Florida social network 
common carrier laws which are a whole other can of s*