Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Spam

MAPS vs. Gordon Feyck: Who Owns the DUL? 211

etrnl writes "The spam-l mailing list has an interesting post from Nick Nicholas about a recent lawsuit between MAPS, LLC. and Gordon Fecyk, who had arranged with Paul Vixie to host the DUL with MAPS in 1998. Even more interesting is that Nick was the Executive Director of MAPS who hired Gordon at MAPS in 1999. Notable quote from Nick: 'I find it extremely ironic that an organization which is currently soliciting donations to its own legal defense fund would now be using its limited resources to pursue litigation against a former employee.'" MAPS wants a temporary restraining order on two separate copyright claims: first, that Feyck can't use the DUL database, and second, that he can't run a too-similar website (now down). The bone of contention is that Feyck claims he bought back the DUL from MAPS, and MAPS disagrees. Incidentally, the DUL is currently stopping CmdrTaco from directly emailing one of the Slash coders.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MAPS vs. Gordon Feyck: Who Owns the DUL?

Comments Filter:
  • by Provincialist ( 572648 ) on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @01:28AM (#3475498)
    Not personally knowing any of the participants, but aware of the issues involved, I had always been willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Blacklists [dmoz.org] are a good technical solution to the social problem that is spam. While I knew there was some animosity between the old MAPS and the old ORBS, I had always assumed that regardless of egotism, they were doing basically the right thing. Certainly, when ORBS was sued by that spammer I was sure the judge had screwed up. [or was it MAPS that got sued? I forget; it may have been both of them] But this current action really leads me to question the motives of MAPS. Spam is only helped when someone who has spent so long fighting it is prevented from using his tools and from developing more tools. It seems that egotism or something very like it has now caused MAPS to do the wrong thing, and that's very unfortunate.

    later,
    Jess

  • by Seth Finkelstein ( 90154 ) on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @01:31AM (#3475509) Homepage Journal
    Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 14:40:12 -0700
    Sender: Spam Prevention Discussion List
    From: Nick Nicholas
    Subject: COURT: MAPS Sues Former Employee and DUL Founder, Gordon Fecyk

    I have been a strongly outspoken supporter of MAPS for many years.

    When I was at pacbell.net I nearly had a heart attack when Paul Vixie called in 1997 to warn us that we were about to be listed in the MAPS RBL for running unsecured mail servers. But I supported his actions even then. Indeed, his call was very helpful in speeding up the bureaucracy at pacbell.net and getting the unsecured mail servers closed to relaying even more quickly. I appreciated Paul's willingness to work with us on resolving our problems.

    I wanted pacbell.net to use the MAPS RBL, but instead I was instructed by management to compile my own list. I felt my meager efforts could not compare to the quality of the RBL made available by MAPS, but, unfortunately, my own wishes were overruled.

    When Paul offered me the opportunity to become Executive Director of MAPS in December 1998, it was an offer I simply could not refuse, and for the next year and a half I was one of the leading cheerleaders for MAPS.

    Even though I left MAPS in August 1999, it was an amicable departure. Soon afterwards I was hired as Chief Privacy Officer for a company in the direct marketing industry, and I still continued to defend MAPS against its many critics in that industry.

    Last year I decided to write a book about the history of MAPS. My intent was to focus on the companies that sued MAPS and abused the legal system in order to prevent MAPS from exercising its legitimate free speech rights. I wanted to portray Paul and Dave Rand as beleaguered but slightly flawed heroes.

    However, my opinion of MAPS was forever changed this past April when it decided to sue DUL founder, Gordon Fecyk, after Gordon attempted to exercise a December 1998 contract he entered into with Paul Vixie in his capacity as MAPS CEO.

    My overview of this matter, as well as copies of court documents filed in the case, can be found at the following URL:

    http://www.lawsuitinfo.com [lawsuitinfo.com]

    It seems that MAPS has learned a great deal from the lawsuits brought against it by Harris Interactive and others, and has adopted the same slimy tactics. In particular, the affidavits filed by Margie Arbon and Anne Mitchell are full of factual errors and material misrepresentations. I will add my commentary on these affidavits at a later date.

    A hearing will be held in the Manitoba court tomorrow (5/7). We will add additional info as soon as possible.

    Gordon may have to sell his car in order to pay his not inconsequential legal bills. Is anyone interested in making a contribution to help Gordon with his legal expenses? If so, please send your contributions to Gordon's attorneys at the following address:

    Cassidy Ramsay
    385 St. Mary Avenue, 2nd Floor
    Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C 0N1
    CANADA

    Checks or money orders should be made out to Cassidy Ramsay

    Be sure to include a note with your contribution stating that it is on behalf of Gordon Fecyk in the Mail Abuse Prevention System v. Fecyk case.

    All contributions will be placed in a trust fund by the law firm and used solely to cover Gordon's legal expenses.

    Contributors will receive an acknowledgement from Cassidy Ramsay. However, all contributions are covered by attorney-client privilege, and thus the identities of contributors will remain anonymous. Information about contributions *cannot* be obtained by MAPS through the discovery process.

    I cannot describe how much it saddens me that it has become necessary for me to bring all of these disturbing facts to light, but I think it is essential for the Internet community to be aware of what MAPS has become. MAPS is no longer devoting its energy to fighting spam and co-operating with others in that fight, but instead is suing a former employee who attempted to exercise his legitimate rights pursuant to a contract with MAPS. I find it extremely ironic that an organization which is currently soliciting donations to its own legal defense fund would now be using its limited resources to pursue litigation against a former employee.

    Regards,

    Nick

  • by yoyoyo ( 520441 ) on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @01:50AM (#3475563)
    SPEWS operates on the principle of collateral damage. If an ISP refuses to remove spammers on their system they expand the listings to include non-spammers.

    Basically they want to make it as inconvenient as possible for the ISP's legitamate customers so that the ISP is pressured to change their ways from the inside.

    I agree that you're in a difficult situation, but nothing else works.

  • Quick summary (Score:3, Interesting)

    by enigma48 ( 143560 ) <jeff_new_slash@NOspam.jeffdom.com> on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @04:08AM (#3475828) Journal
    MAPS might have a few good points but in my wholly uninformed point of view, they seem to deserve to lose.

    To sum up 3 years:

    Gordon Fecyk: Hey Paul, here is the DUL - I'll even indemnify you of any damages because of the list.

    Paul Vixie: Great - I'll make you the maintainer of the DUL and we'll draw something up saying you can regain ownership of the DUL for $10 (the contract minimum in the US at the time). MAPS will take the good and the bad - all the publicity and all the legal trouble associated with it. When you want to leave, you can take the DUL back for $10.

    forward 3 years

    GF to Dave Rand/MAPS: I'm leaving. Here is $10. I have a recent copy of the DUL. I own it. You can use it free for a little while and we'll work out a contract after that. I'll even let you have first change to negotiate for it.

    MAPS to GF: Lawsuit.

    MAPS argues in the lawsuit that GF doesn't own the DUL and even if he did, he couldn't maintain it properly on his own, it causes legal issues with MAPS (privacy issues), saying that he owns it hurts MAPS, etc.

    If I was MAPS, I'd be protecting my income sources as strongly as possible. Not having followed the MAPS project/organization much and seeing they still accept donations, I would be worried too.

    The right thing to do would be to honour the agreement between Paul Vixie and Gordon Fecyk. If it bankrupts the organization, it is a sad thing but something could be worked out. (eg: cheap licencing - Gordon seems *very* reasonable)

    The wrong thing is to fight for your life and not even try to do the right thing first.

    Then again, if the DUL is a major source of income for them, I can't seem them caring much about doing the right thing. Morals are nice but survival comes first I suppose.

    My morals suggested I check google for a cached version of the DUL and post the link but it looks like google didn't get it in time. Anyone have links?

    Jeff
  • by blowdart ( 31458 ) on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @08:02AM (#3476217) Homepage

    http://web.archive.org/web/20010619203232/http://w ww.orca.bc.ca/dul/ [archive.org]

    Fun to see the name change from ORCA.BC.CA DUL to MAPS DUL in progress.

  • by mjh ( 57755 ) <mark@horncRASPlan.com minus berry> on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @10:03AM (#3476864) Homepage Journal
    No, I'm not trolling. I'm quite serious. I think that RBL's are not as effective at their job of blocking spam as TMDA and spamassassin. If you think that spamassassin is just an rbl, then you've misunderstood it. If you think TMDA's blacklist makes it an rbl, then you've misunderstood it.

    Spamassassin is an email heuristic system that takes ordb (and other rbl's) under advisement. But it is not the final say. It also uses vipul's razor [sourceforge.net] as an advisor, but again it's not the final say. Spamassassin has hundreds of different tests [spamassassin.org] that it performs to determine whether or not an email is a spam. Only a few of which are rbl based tests.

    TMDA is a system that doesn't depend on any RBL (Realtime Blackhole List). And contrary to your understanding, it's primary mechanism is NOT a blacklist, it's a whitelist. It's a completely different technology than an RBL. Even if you do use it with a blacklist, it's based on email addresses not IP addresses. So if you spam me, and I blacklist you, your brother on the same email server can still send me email.

    I stand by my original claim. RBL's are antiquated technology in comparison to TMDA and spamassassin. They paint too broad of a brush stroke, blocking many people who you want to receive email from, while failing to block many others who you don't want to receive email from.

Everybody likes a kidder, but nobody lends him money. -- Arthur Miller

Working...