On Thursday, February 7, 2013, Gert Doering  wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I think we perfectly agree that *criminals* should have taken their<br>

address space away, and that&#39;s what the NCC does.  Now, &quot;criminals&quot; - and<br>
this is where we know to disagree - are not folks that send e-mails that<br>
other folks do not like, but folks where an instrument of the law has<br>
decided &quot;they are criminals&quot; (LEOs or courts).<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Ah, so the difference between spammers and other forms of online criminals like, say, botmasters</div><div><br></div><div>I do however put it to you that there are plenty of email marketers who acquire IP space under their own business names, without having to create an endless series of shell companies to acquire outsize IP allocations.  </div>
<div><br></div><div>Does that mean RIPE NCC might want to, for example, have the dutch regulator that has a remit on antispam, OPTA, take a stand in this matter, if you are that concerned with penalizing genuine criminals rather than &quot;people who send email that I don&#39;t like&quot;?  An interesting idea.<span></span></div>
<div><br></div><div>--srs </div><br><br>-- <br>--srs (iPad)<br>