Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Spammed By LimestoneNetworks - Page 5
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

Spammed By LimestoneNetworks

1235»

Comments

  • NexusNexus Member
    edited October 2012

    @Bdtech, the OP was acting border-line "humble" and was like "WoW" this large company is emailing me?!?!?

    Then, that company files a DMCA against LET/this thread... They made it into a large uproar by themselves, 24khost did nothing.. LSN blew this way out of proportion. Heck they even filed a copyright claim on imageshack from an uploaded photo taken off their "public" facebook page. They are greedy, filthy and despicable. Stay far away.

    Edit: I am pretty sure I wouldn't give a rat's ass about some guy making a thread about my company on some forum. But that's just me.

  • Yes, but you see, you do need to 'give a rat's ass' when people most likely will come upto this when searching for your company.

    And they're a real company who's in it for the long haul, so reputation of their brand matters.

    They do what they do very well though, so I don't see this hurting them much.

    Why am I even explaining this, this should be common knowledge <_<;

  • @bdtech said: I don't understand the uproar.

    From what I can tell, the main thing right now is not that they are spamming, it's the fact that they filed a DMCA against LET.

    Thanked by 2Randy Maounique
  • @SimpleNode I get that now, just don't quite understand how this came about as a post. Seems like companies reach out to others all the time. The email was personal and relevant.

    Thanked by 1NickM
  • As a current customer of LSN it's disheartening to see the company, who I trust my data with, abuse DMCA.

    In my experience their service and support has been great. Though some direct apologies are due and some departments have room for improvement coughmarketing/salescough.

  • RandyRandy Member
    edited October 2012

    @mojeda said: In my experience their service and support has been great.

    +1 . but not for Mr. wooden Block (Andrew.C)...

    Kris .A made a big mistake

  • @Wintereise said: And they're a real company who's in it for the long haul, so reputation of their brand matters.

    Shooting off a frivolous DMCA is not the way to keep your brand clean. It may work with a single blogger, but with a community like this it's akin to kicking a hornet's nest.

    Thanked by 3Randy NateN34 Maounique
  • @Randy: He's actually a nice guy to talk to...

  • at times yes, but i like Kris and Austin.B or Austin.J

  • @sleddog said: The original email sent by LSN did not endanger democracy, freedom or human rights. Turning it into that is (IMO) creating a tempest in a teapot.

    The issue does need to be made a mountain out of a molehill for the sole reason of DMCA abuse. Sometimes you need to make a stand on small issues so the same tactic is not used later on an important issue. It is too easy to let liberty creep happen as you slowly lose freedoms because it did not affect you. But what about the issue that does affect you? You'll be damn glad someone stood up previously, like here, so it is not even tried.

    We see DMCA abuse being used as a tool to silence legitimate speech far too often. I would not be surprised if it was in the playbook for some of the large rights holders. As the law is written, all that can be done to these abusers is to petition the court for a perjury violation, and a large fine to go with it, hopefully large enough to make those who would abuse the process think twice the next time they think it is ok to file false claims to silence speech.

  • @mojeda said: As a current customer of LSN it's disheartening to see the company, who I trust my data with, abuse DMCA.

    Escape while you can!

  • image

    Thanked by 2Infinity Maounique
  • risharderisharde Member, Host Rep
    edited October 2012

    I agree with @VDNet but I could be totally wrong and this is indeed subjective to the person but the email looked like it was personally directed so I beg to differ. BTW, I have no affiliation with the said company but I think that this "SPAM" email was one of those draw the line on what is spam and what isn't. I am of the unpopular opinion that one email has been blown out of proportion and I now feel sorry for LSN since as someone mentioned it is now on Google page 2 when searching for LSN. I would have appreciated that email because no one emails me about good server offers and for me its sometimes nice to redirect my friends and customers to a good deal if one is in fact available. On the other hand, you could just block the lmn networks domain so you receive no more and you did get an apology from what you said. Anyways, what's done is done, I guess LSN might now have to look for another way of promoting their offers/services.

    EDIT: Thanks miTgiB for the heads up.. seems I was somehow thinking about Lifetime Movie Network at the time lol ;)

  • @risharde said: I guess LMN might now have to look for another way of promoting their offers/services.

    Which they should have done to begin with. You may not feel it was spam, but it was unsolicited, and in violation of CAN-SPAM. If you want to receive those types of offers, I am sure there is someplace to subscribe yourself as being welcome to them, but there are laws against what they did.

    P.S. It's LSN (LimeStone Networks)

    Thanked by 1risharde
  • @miTgiB said: You may not feel it was spam, but it was unsolicited, and in violation of CAN-SPAM.

    I'll admit that I haven't exactly been following this whole issue very closely, but as far as I can see, there's not enough evidence for me to judge whether the email was in violation of CAN-SPAM or not. Simply being unsolicited does not mean an email is a CAN-SPAM violation.

  • @NickM said: Simply being unsolicited does not mean an email is a CAN-SPAM violation.

    Simply being unsolicited without a prior relationship in fact does make it in violation.

  • @miTgiB said: Simply being unsolicited without a prior relationship in fact does make it in violation.

    No, actually, it doesn't. You can send unsolicited emails without a prior relationship if you follow all of the guidelines regarding opt-outs, content (marking adult content as "SEXUALLY EXPLICIT", having a relevant subject line, having a valid From header, and the company's address), and sending behavior (not using an open relay, not using email addresses obtained by automated means, and not falsifying any headers).

    Thanked by 1risharde
  • And had no opt-out link either, at least this is how I understood and 24k said.
    I also feel sorry for LSN, this was probably a mistake they regret (DMCA stuff), but there should be 0 tolerance for things like those, others will look and say, hey, I can scare ppl with that or at least put them in trouble or make them pay (LSN charges for those), so, why not, 0 risks...
    The risks should be high and clear enough so that DMCA is used only in cases where it was supposed to (not that those are just too few, mind you, it can be interpreted too loosely, but this was clearly not one of those borderline cases).
    Even if I dont like it and I am convinced LSN is a solid and supportive host, I have to beat this dead horse so other alive horses wont think to do the same.
    M

    Thanked by 2risharde ihatetonyy
  • I think that when discussing laws we need to keep in mind that 1. the sender and 2. the receiver need to be in the same country for the local laws to apply. This is probably not always the case.

    In the current case it can be argued that LSN violated some US spam laws, but imho that shouldn't be the main point. The main point is trying to suppress negative publicity via questionable copyright notices.

    Thanked by 1risharde
  • risharderisharde Member, Host Rep

    One thing is for certain, it makes a helluva a good thread to follow such discussion and I thank you all for enlightening me as well. Not to sway the topic too much but are there laws related to other mediums like social media? In other words, can someone be held liable for "SPAM" via alternative mediums to email? I'm thinking that if not, that would also be ironic that we still uphold spam laws for email and not for other mediums if you catch my drift

  • DomainBopDomainBop Member
    edited October 2012

    @risharde _"Not to sway the topic too much but are there laws related to other mediums like social media? In other words, can someone be held liable for "SPAM" via alternative mediums to email?" _

    The CAN-SPAM Act also applies to social network SPAM posted to walls, profiles, news feeds.

    A US Federal Court ruled last year in Facebook, Inc. v. MaxBounty, Inc that messages posted on Facebook walls and news feeds are
    considered “electronic mail messages under the CAN-SPAM Act" which means that they should follow the same guidelines as a commercial message sent by regular email. There were also 2 earlier rulings involving MySpace that also found that social network postings on walls/profiles can be considered spam.

    http://www.pillsburylaw.com/sitefiles/publications/intellectualpropertyvirtualworldsvideogamesclientalertcacourtrulescanspamapplicabletosocialmediamessaging04072011final.pdf

    Thanked by 1risharde
  • risharderisharde Member, Host Rep

    Thanks @DomainBop I really need to read this act in detail then, much appreciated

  • Was there an apology already?

  • Featured article
    http://www.limestonenetworks.com/support/kc/1/1/spamvertising.html
    Part of limestonenetworks knowledge center cat. Abuse
    also nice article about Malicious Network Traffic
    Powered by Google SearchEngine how to find limestonenetworks com spam
    Searching is provided By Google Searches related to limestone networks

  • ChiefChief Member
    edited October 2012

    @jcaleb said: Was there an apology already?

    Zip, Zilch, Nada. So lets give away some prizes to celebrate!

    Up for grabs....
    1x ChicagoVPS 2GB Ram OpenVZ VPS for 1 Year
    1x Urpad 1GB Ram SSD OpenVZ VPS for 1 Year

    How to enter...
    Perform 1 of these for 1 entry, or all 3 for a maximum of 3 entries per person.
    Prizes awarded in 24 hours.

    • Comment on LowEndBox (Click Here)
    • Tweet the LowEndBox Announcement and mention @LowEndNetwork (Click Here)
    • Comment on this post on Facebook (Click Here)

    Thanked by 2Nexus jcaleb
  • Let me state there was an apology at WHT to me and that community. There was no apology to the LET community.

Sign In or Register to comment.