Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: REe: OMLET: The Ultimate Spammer

Re: REe: OMLET: The Ultimate Spammer

From: Joel Garry <>
Date: 14 Jul 2004 13:36:38 -0700
Message-ID: <> (omlet v4) wrote in message news:<>...
> Daniel Morgan <> wrote in message news:<1089639996.64153_at_yasure>...
> > omlet v4 wrote:
> > > Dear DBA,
> > >
> > > The OMLET Team
> > > Tera Knowledge Systems, Inc.
> > >
> > > PS. If you feel that this is spam and you read this by mistake, we
> > > apologize, ignore it and have a nice day.
> >
> > This is pure unadulterated spam.
> >
> > Omlet is a one person company and the appearance of being a legitimate
> OMLET is a registered product as your university lawyers would tell
> you soon.

Actually, you will discover that by using the registered symbol without having properly registered, the PTO will not let you register it should you choose to actually do so. Perhaps you confused it with copyright?

> > company, Tera Knowledge Systems, Inc. a pure fraud.
> Now I can sue you and your university for a large sum of money.

For what? Truth is an absolute defense against libel, and libel (in the US, anyways) is more difficult to prove when you are public figure. Posting probably makes you a public figure. Interference with commercial activities? Good luck. Pretty much any suit you could bring would get you an abuse of action suit back in spades. First amendment rights trump libel in the US. Of course, where you are may be different, they might cut off those offensive eggs. Or did they already?

> >
> > Go to any domain registrar and you will find that Omlet is not a
> Any info you get from domain registrars cannot be posted; it is simply
> addresses on a credit card. Do NOT break the law. If you choose to
> break the law; break it with your own account, not your university
> account. University of Washington is a great university and has a lot
> of BEEF too!

What the hell are you talking about?

Nothing about restrictions of posting here, this is all about not using whois data to spam or as a data mine: "NOTICE AND TERMS OF USE: You are not authorized to access or query our WHOIS database through the use of high-volume, automated, electronic processes or for the purpose or purposes of using the data in any manner that violates these terms of use. The Data in Network Solutions' WHOIS database is provided by Network Solutions for information purposes only, and to assist persons in obtaining information about or related to a domain name registration record. Network Solutions does not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a WHOIS query, you agree to abide by the following terms of use: You agree that you may use this Data only for lawful purposes and that under no circumstances will you use this Data to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via direct mail, e-mail, telephone, or facsimile; or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that apply to Network Solutions (or its computer systems). The compilation, repackaging, dissemination or other use of this Data is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Network Solutions. You agree not to use high-volume, automated, electronic processes to access or query the WHOIS database. Network Solutions reserves all rights and remedies it now has or may have in the future, including, but not limited to, the right to terminate your access to the WHOIS database in its sole discretion, for any violations by you of these terms of use, including without limitation, for excessive querying of the WHOIS database or for failure to otherwise abide by these terms of use. Network Solutions reserves the right to modify these terms at any time." Dissemination? That's ridiculous, what do they think the S stands for in DNS? Not to mention as an adhesion contract, this is quite a bit different than a law. With no severability in the terms, either. If they have a problem with any of us posting whois info, I'm sure they can figure out how to sue us or stop us from accessing the service. I'm sure the judge would have the usual opinion of an adhesion contract, too.

Of course, you could direct us to information that assuages concerns. But since Daniel is right, I don't expect you to do that. Or maybe Noons is right and you are just a troll and there are innocent victims here.


-- is bogus.
Received on Wed Jul 14 2004 - 15:36:38 CDT

Original text of this message