
Hello, On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:59:52PM +0200, anthony.somerset@cloudunboxed.net wrote:
- Is there value in a task force of members to examine these issues?
I don't have a particular position here at this time, Data protection violations and spam quiet frankly are a pain in the ass - but I get it for everything these days - not just IP brokers....
From what I could see and my own point of view, no one was expecting RIPE NCC to engage in legal pursuit of the person who had harvested
I feel like a distinction should maybe be made between random companies that harvest and market to addresses in the RIPE DB and list archives, versus members of our community who do the same. Christian suggested that the current policy really begins and ends at issuing a warning, with the "nuclear option" of legal means being held in reserve. Issues of practicality force that to be the case for third parties that RIPE NCC has no relationship with, but should we not expect members of our community who sign contracts with RIPE NCC to abide by the terms and conditions of RIPE NCC services and the norms of our community? Is there any scope in investigating temporary withholding of service, moderation etc for community members who are breaching the terms and conditions like this? the email addresses and marketed to them. It was more that this person was able to continue interacting with the community after that blatant disregard of its norms. That is something that is in our control is it not? There have been times I have been tempted to also suggest that the ban on autoresponders is enforced by having RIPE NCC staff investigate which subscribed address is causing it and which LIR that address belongs to, disabling that address's delivery and then billing the LIR 100€/hr for the work. But perhaps that is a step too far! Cheers, Andy