[Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Update on legal case

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

Hi Ronald,

Yes, no doubt the other fish is more important now ... but all this is also relevant for the case, and legal counsel may need to consider all that in front of the Courts ...

The typical interpretation of the DPA is (from previous judgements): If your email about the vacation spot is a "friend" recommendation, they it may be that you only get a warning if I didn't offered to you my email as "friend", but you captured it from a mailing list. However, if you're sending the email because you have some "business", "commissions" or anything with that "promotion" of the spot, then it is a spam, unless I've provided a previous and explicit consent.

"selling" a Board candidate it is spam, no doubts. It is unethical, unmoral and against the usage rules of the whois and mail exploders.

The whois is a database to know registered resources and be able to contact the responsible people for matters related to that.

Even if the whois "rules" don't explicitly mention that, the GDPR is on top of the whois rules which already said previous and explicit consent for a specific matter.

According GDPR, if you have my email because you sell me fruits, and you decide to start selling fish, you need my previous and explicit consent for spamming me about the fish.

 
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 29/7/21 11:03, "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg at tristatelogic.com> escribió:

    In message <B5466637-1357-4A61-B583-06EB35EDD076 at consulintel.es>, 
    JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es> wrote:

    >I disagree. At a minimum they were against the equivalent to the GDPR
    >in Mauritius, as they used information collected from whois, mail
    >exploders, etc., for a different purpose that the one agreed.

    It may have escaped your attention Jordi, but I think that AFRINIC has
    some rather bigger fish to fry at the moment.

    More to the point, if I email you offline and tell you that I happen to
    know of a great vacation spot in Barcelona that you may want to try out
    some day, are you going to report me to the Spanish GDPR police?

    At what point does the over-agressive interpretation and/or enforcement
    of GDPR, either in Europe or in Mauritius, become nothing by a bad joke,
    deserving of nothing but scorn and ridicule?

    GDPR was written to respond to over-the-top absurdities like the revelations
    about Facebook and their unholy relationship with Cambridge Analytica.  It
    was *not* written so that you could rat me out to the GDRP police when I
    tell you and three other friends about my favorite restaurant.

    >Also, it is against the usage terms of the whois and CoC.

    Apparently, lots of things are against the CoC.  I have been pointlessly
    harassed merely because it is -alleged- that speaking ill of the Mauritian
    judiciary is a violation of the CoC.

    If we're all going to become bickering lawyers when it comes to such
    small things, then I'd like to now assert *my* rights under both the
    the United States First Amendment and also the entirely clear provisions
    of the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19,
    to say whatever I damn well please about the Mauritian judiciary, and
    without any further interference or improper chastisments on the part
    of AFRINIC staff members who aren't lawyers but who nontheless like to
    pretend that they are.

        https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/udhr.pdf

    As regards to the WHOIS Terms & Conditions, show me the part that you
    think was violated, and I'll show you how it doesn't mean what you
    apparently think it means.


    Regards,
    rfg

    _______________________________________________
    Community-Discuss mailing list
    Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.