[Magilla Marketing] David Linhardt, the marketer who won an $11.7 million judgment against The Spamhaus Project, says he's got plans to force the UK anti-spam group into irrelevancy.

However, most e-mail experts don't think there is a whole lot he can do.

"We're implementing a strategy that's going to make it very difficult for them [Spamhaus] to do business in the U.S.," said Linhardt, who is CEO of e-mail marketing concern e360 Insight. However, he declined to give details. "We're in a war here and I don't want to telegraph any plans too soon."

An Illinois court on Sept. 13 ordered Spamhaus to pay e360 Insight $11.7 million in damages and just under $2,000 in litigation costs. The decision barred Spamhaus from causing e-mail sent by e360 Insight or any of its affiliates to be blocked. The judgment also ordered Spamhaus to post a one-inch-by-one-inch message on its site for six months saying that the group erroneously listed e360 Insight as a spammer.

However, the decision was a default judgment because Spamhaus failed to show up in court and defend itself. Spamhaus contends the Illinois court has no jurisdiction over it and has challenged Linhardt to file a suit on the anti-spam group's home turf in the UK.

Spamhaus maintains a list of IP addresses it deems are those of spammers. An unknown number of e-mail inbox providers use the list to determine whether or not to filter incoming e-mail. It is estimated that as much as 20% of a sender's outbound e-mail can be blocked if Spamhaus blacklists its servers.

According to Linhardt, Spamhaus has been listing every IP address it can find associated with his company because of a business arrangement Linhardt had with another vendor that has since been terminated.

He also claims he hasn't exhausted his legal options in the U.S.

"We got a favorable judgment, so now we're trying to see if that can be enforced in any way," he said. "That's where we are at this point. We're going to pursue all legal remedies that are available to us."

When asked if he plans on using the court decision to pressure the Internet service providers who use Spamhaus to stop, Linhardt said: "This is not an assault on ISPs. We want to work with them to minimize complaints; we don't have any interest in sending mail to somebody who doesn't receive it. By the same token, if they're using an illegal blacklist, we would encourage them to reconsider their policy of doing that."

Meanwhile, court documents show that Spamhaus originally responded to Linhardt's lawsuit, but then backed out.

Famed anti-spam lawyer Pete Wellborn's name appears on documents filed on Spamhaus' behalf on a July 21 in response to e360's complaint.

However, Spamhaus reportedly failed to meet an Aug. 17 deadline to file discovery materials.

According to multiple sources, Spamhaus balked at Wellborn's price for seeing the case through. Wellborn referred this publication to Spamhaus' director Steve Linford for comment. Linford has failed to respond to two e-mails.

Internet and e-mail expert John Levine said he believes Spamhaus would have won handily if it had defended itself. However, battling the case out in a U.S. court would require Spamhaus to agree that the U.S. court has jurisdiction over it.

"If [the suit] actually slogged through the legal system there and was resolved, there was no way this guy [Linhardt] would succeed," said Levine. "But in the way he's filed his complaint, he wants vast amounts of discovery. It's specifically designed to make things as excruciatingly painful as possible before the plaintiff loses."

Levine said the reason e360 got everything it asked for in the Illinois ruling was because Spamhaus didn't show up.

"The guy gave the judge a proposed ridiculous order, and since Spamhaus didn't answer it, the judge had no option but to say OK," said Levine. "In a just world, the judge would have looked at it and said, 'This is ridiculous, I'm going to charge you $1,000 for wasting my time and that would have been that."