Return to Home
Solutions About Us News Contact Us
Return to Home
 
 
 
 
   
     
  Case History e360Insight v. The Spamhaus Project  
Permission Marketer Forced To Take On Leading Antispam Vigilante
  Spamhaus began deliberately interfering with our business and attempting to smear our name in November of 2003. After losing several customers and suppliers as a result of being on their SBL and ROKSO blacklists, we tried contacting them directly in an attempt to address their concerns. The only way to contact them is through email, so we began our quest to understand their requirements to be removed from their lists. Unfortunately, these attempts failed. Spamhaus refused to provide us with sufficient instructions for getting off of their blacklists. They also failed to provide sufficient evidence to back up their claims or to justify their actions. Spamhaus' only response was to threaten us and call us names. All of their replies can be paraphrased in one sentence -- "stop spamming spammer."

Spamhaus didn't seem to care that we are an opt-in email marketing company. They didn't seem to care that the only way to get onto our mailing list was to signup for it. They didn't seem to care about the thousands of customers who would not receive order confirmation messages or other email messages they requested. They didn't care about the lost dollars in legitimate commerce or about the employees who lost their jobs as a result. As a UK-based organization with the majority of their business in the US, they didn't appear to care about U.S. laws and they weren't shy about saying so. They also didn't seem to care one iota about the data inaccuracies in their database, which is reportedly used by 65% of ISPs in the U.S.

In these circumstances, our only recourse was to pursue legal action to fight for our right to exist and our right to conduct legitimate business.

List of Events & Documentation Used In This Case

05.25.06 - e360 instructed its attorney, Mr. Darren Green to write a letter to Spamhaus asking them cease and desist their improper activities. The letter asked for a response by June 9, 2006.



06.09.06 - No response received from Spamhaus

06.12.06 - e360 retains Synergy Law Group and Bart Loethen as lead counsel

06.21.06 - Synergy Law Group files complaint on behalf of e360 with Illinois Circuit Court



07.07.06 - Synergy Lay Group files a motion for a preliminary injunction and a motion for expedited discovery in Illinois Circuit Court







07.11.06 - Spamhaus identifies two new e360 suppliers, Multacom and Nextpoint. Spamhaus immediately adds their networks to the SBL and ROKSO blacklists. Multacom and Nextpoint are forced to terminate e360's service based on agreements with their upstream bandwidth providers.

07.16.06 - Synergy Law Group files a motion for a temporary restraining order against Spamhaus until the Court has time to conduct a hearing





07.20.06 - Illinois Circuit Court issues a Temporary Restraining Order instructing Spamhaus to immediately remove 'e360' and 'Linhardt' for the ROSKO search results. To the best of our knowledge, this was the first order ever given to Spamhaus by a U.S. court.



July 21, 2006 - Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP files Notice of Removal in U.S. Federal Court to get the case transferred from the Circuit Court. Court creates CASE #: 1:06-cv-03958











07.24.06 - Spamhaus complies with TRO by the deadline and removes "e360" and "linhardt" from the ROKSO search results on spamhaus.org.

After reviewing the case facts with their attorneys, Mr. Linford concludes that his position is indefensible and that he will likely lose the case on its merits. Mr. Linford abruptly fires his attorneys and instructs them to remove their response to the complaint. By taking this action, Spamhaus has made it clear that their legal strategy is to ignore the case, disregard the Court and run away and hide.

07.25.06 - Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP send letter to all stating they have been removed as counsel of record.

08.09.06 - for Plaintiffs e360 Insight, LLC, David Linhardt by Joseph L Kish (Kish, Joseph) (Entered: 08/09/2006)

08.09.06 - for Plaintiffs e360 Insight, LLC, David Linhardt by Kristen M Lehner (Lehner, Kristen) (Entered: 08/09/2006)

08.10.06 - for Plaintiffs e360 Insight, LLC, David Linhardt by Bartly Joseph Loethen (mb, ) (Entered: 08/14/2006)

08.11.06 - Judge Charles P. Kocoras sets a for August 23, 2006.

08.17.06 - Spamhaus was ordered to turn over all discovery materials by this date. They failed to comply with the court order.

08.17, 18 & 19.06 - Spamhaus implements a blacklisting "jihad" on any ip addresses and networks it can find even remotely associated with e360. The listings created at this time include SBL26394, SBL45581, SBL45582, SBL45583, SBL45584, SBL45585, SBL45586, SBL45587, SBL45648, SBL45649, SBL45651, SBL45652 and SBL45685. Spamhaus includes references to 'Atriks' and 'Brian Haberstroh', ROSKO-listed entities, in an effort to continue defaming e360 even though the listed networks are not associated with these entities in any way whatsoever. Spamhaus adds a plethora of new misinformation into their blacklists by including several networks that have never been used for commercial email, those that have never been under control of e360 and networks that were only used for double-confirmed email messages, Spamhaus' stated compliance standard. Spamhaus even listed Mr. Linhardt's ip address associated with his cable modem connection as his home office.

08.18.06 - Synergy Law Group files a for failure to comply with Court ordered discovery. Supporting exhibits include .

08.21.06 - Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP files a as counsel for Spamhaus

08.21.06 - Synergy Law Group files a motion for rule to show cause for Spamhaus violating the Temporary Restraining Order.







(CONTINUE TO NEXT PAGE)

Please contact us with questions about this case. If you are a reporter working on a deadline, you can call our media relations department at . Select the option to have us paged if you need to reach us immediately.


 
  Return to News Page
 
     
©2007 copyright statement