Slashdot Mirror


Megaspammer Monsterhut Loses On Appeal

Werehatrack writes "Much jubilation was expressed in news.admin.net-abuse.email when it was learned that the long-running court battle between PaeTec and Monsterhut had reached a definitive conclusion on Friday with a New York appeals court finding in favor of PaeTec which finally allowed PaeTec to pull the plug on their least-loved customer's connectivity. PaeTec was actually somewhat restrained in its news announcement on its own website, simply noting that they had won and that they had disconnected Monsterhut."

19 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. Big Whoop by adjensen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...so they'll move somewhere else and waste someone else's legal budget trying to get them gone.

    Until there are real laws with teeth that take these guys down for good, victories will be short lived.

    Not to mention the fact that, since they seem to be able to afford the legal fees of a losing battle, they're obviously making some serious coin from a gullible public, which simply means more and more of these bozos as time goes on.

    Sigh....between spam and virii this last week, I don't think I really wanted to see 10% of my email.

  2. Anti -spam Court Decision by Medevo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This decision will hopefully create a legal presedent, that anyone, even from Large companies to single users, cannot abuse the internet and its services.

    With this decision in hand hopefully the government can make some sort of new law that says that if you send out a large number of e-mails (spam), that your account is disabled immedatly, pending a full review. A law like this could reduce the internet bandwith signifigantly, and allow legitiment users to gain faster access to the services they desire.

    Lets see what this does in the ongoing war against internet abusers

    Medevo

  3. Re:Lunacy. by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well i dont know the particulars but it may be that the ISP desicded not to kick them off just so they limit their potential damages, in case they lost.

  4. Damn, they lost. I'll miss them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    All the good stuff is being banned. Our British freedoms are going away! Vote for socialists and communists!

  5. Moving Overseas by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Considering they sued the last one. I mean, would you hook these people up, knowing that you'd be lining yourself up for a good round of lawyering?

    They'll probably hook up with an ISP in Asia someplace, where people haven't figured out the details about spam yet.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  6. Paetec is just as bad they allowed the spamming by bxbaser · · Score: 2, Insightful

    read the case documents
    the first complaint filed March 22, 2001
    items 8 and 9
    paetec allowed monsterhut to spam as long as the complaints where below 2%

    they both should be put in jail.
    this isnt a hurray for the isp and boo for the spammer. Its a spammer geting screwed by a spammer

  7. Re:Lunacy. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh my god. This is sad. That someone would mod this up as funny... I never intended it that way. I know I post alot of goofy shit, but I was 110% deadly serious this time.

    And I don't find it funny at all. :(

    I just accused our judicial system of being morally bankrupt and functionally impotent. Flamebait would have been more appropriate. Even troll. I think I'll go cry now.

  8. 1 down.... by tcc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    34723984723 to go...

    There's one thing I don't get. We are tax payers, the people we elect are law-makers, they are paid to find solutions to common problems. They love passing laws. But WHY do they always have to go against the population and not work with them?

    Get this: name me 10 subject that would get 99% approval among the population? heck even TAX CUT wouldn't get 99% because some people would be affraid of the system collapsing, etc etc... but SPAM? come on... if it's not 99% it's going to be 99.9%.

    My question is: Why is the system so slow about it? why am I being spammed at a rate of 80 messages a day (including 20 that passes the "HIGH" setting in my hotmail account) I mean if I get spammed, I am sure senate representatives are getting spammed like hell too, I am sure it costs microsoft a LOT in bandwidth and storage and all to keep up with spam on their service (if they have a million of users that are like me receiving 20 spam for 1 valid email (and I am not joking) their system is totally wasted for nothing.

    Why so much tolerance? why not blocking every higher class where the biggest spam machines comes from? the hell with the valid users; if they are cutted out, they will do something other than reading about it and sitting there, switch ISP or if it's another country with only one wire well they will do pressure to the higher instances to get their connection back. My way might be drastic, but I am FED UP with it, I've been waiting for 3 years for this problem to get solved and it's just getting worse.

    It's like... remember like 5-10 years ago when you could post on usenet without getting any trouble? the worst thing that could happen to you was someone using flash.c against you? :), When I saw the net going commercial, I knew this would be bad, I said "well one day everybody will have a net connection and I'll have higher speed" and this is the good side, but some days I'd rather go back to my unix dialup account and have the feeling I had without the aggression of abusive emails, script kiddies and all that crap we have these days... ok this is a bit extreme but I'm sure you all get the idea.

    We are barely starting to see something happening, but it's not by destroying the spam of ONE guy that you will scare the others off, this is going to get out of hands even worse, they will see how the legal system is bloated and exploit every single holes in it if they have to.

    The system seems to protect the megacorporation more than little guys like you and me, but in this case, it would help BOTH sides, so why is it taking so long? cut asia off for a day, heck, DO SOMETHING. Ideas? heck , these guys are payed over twice my salary to come up with creative ideas, why don't they do their jobs and save me from taking the laws in my own hands?

    --
    --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
    1. Re:1 down.... by tcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That doesn't have to do anything with spammers, they don't receive a zit from spammers, the typical spammer is a guy running a home buisness or a store that thinks like "if I send out 40,000 email and get a response from only 0.1% of that amount it's going to recuperate the costs and make it worthwhile (and it wouldn't work if people were smart, the problem is SOME people do respond).

      I still don't understand how you can operate a mouse and a keyboard, and respond to an email that will help you to get out of debt and entrust your finance to someone that SPAMMED you, I don't know what kind of education these people get but this is very sad. And this is one of the place where the government should protect people from themselves and I wouldn't say anything.

      Anyways the point is, big corporation are even more touched than us as individuals, because they get a LOT of traffic wasted on their net feed, they need extra ressources on their mail servers and either a net admin or every employee needs to check their junk folders once in a while to trim the crap from the good messaged filtered out, this costs productivity and equipment for something that shouldn't be there in the first place.

      You don't see telemarketters calling people one by one thru the receptionnist in a 1000 employee company right? you don't see vacuum vendors going from desk to desk in large corporations :). You get the idea. This touches EVERYBODY with no exeptions, this isn't a matter of having money or not, these spammers are taxing useless bandwidth, time, and hardware, and I am not even counting how many are total frauds.

      --
      --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
    2. Re:1 down.... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it's easiest to use a metaphor here, so I'll try to make it a good one. Let's start with the internet, circa 1985.

      At this point in time, the internet was much like some pristine wilderness, barely touched by mankind. The american west in the early 1800s, or maybe a south pacific island at the same time. Beautiful, clean. Able to go anywhere you want, and no one notices. Sure, you can't run down to the 7-11 and buy some chips and beer, and it can even be a rough place to live, but it's just so satisfying. Time could stand still, and you wouldn't complain.

      Fast forward to 2002. This pristine wilderness is now covered by smog (popup ads, spam) being churned out by the local factory (spamhaus). There are fences everywhere, buildings built every concievable place, and the few open areas are public parks that don't let you do anything interesting. You can't fly a kite (run a webserver on yourr cablemodem, perrhaps). You can't put whatever sign you want on the front of your leased office building (hosted website). The zoning officials are constantly demanding bribes. And the crime rate in your section of town is horrifying. Not that anyone ever comes here anymore, ever since the Best Buys and Amazons bribed the local politicians to stop the expressway from coming through that area (baby bell dsl fiasco).

      Face it, the internet is now one large inner city ghetto, and you don't have any money to move.

    3. Re:1 down.... by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Get this: name me 10 subject that would get 99% approval among the population? heck even TAX CUT wouldn't get 99% because some people would be affraid of the system collapsing, etc etc... but SPAM? come on... if it's not 99% it's going to be 99.9%.

      My question is: Why is the system so slow about it?


      Because some people would consider Spam to be speech (as in "free speech"), which makes it a Constitutional issue. And the courts are slow (or "deliberate", to spin it more positively).

    4. Re:1 down.... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not just a constitutional issue, but a constitual issue. Even if the spammers don't give a dime in campaign contributions, the esteemed members of congress know that the majority of the money they do get comes from corporations. If spamming were successfully regulated and that regulation passed judicial review, it would establish precedent for corporate speech not being considered worthy of protection under the first amendment. It is only a small step down the slippery slope to go from regulating spam, to regulating the bribe economy that state and federal governments run on.

      For if corporate speech is not free, then all the campaign contributions that have corrupted the hell out of our legislative system are no longer considered a protected right of the American corporate citizen. Thus the status quo for the ruling elite would change dramatically (until a new loophole was found). Those ruling elite up in washington like things the way they are, it's a great gig if you can get it, as the saying goes and they don't want to lose it.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  9. Megaspammer booted offline? But how am I... by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    going to make my penis bigger for the web's youngest teen babes?

    --


    Evil is the money of root.
  10. A license to spam by mrsam · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with the whole Monsterhut situation was that they basically had a completely free hand at spamming the shit out of everyone's mailboxes, while this whole thing slowly made its way through courts. Monsterhut obtained a TRO against being shut down by Paetec for any reason, while this whole thing was playing out.

    Nice, eh? A license to spam.

    Well, it's all water under the bridge now. The consensus in various forums where this whole issue was discussed to death was that Paetec was making a good-faith effort to get the whole mess resolved and Monsterhut shut down. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I always had the impression that Paetec was always too eager to trot out the excuse that they are prohibited by court order from shutting down this spamming parasite, in response to every spam complaint (with a generous side-order of crocodile tears).

    Anyway, I firmly believe that Monsterhut had a pink contract here, but when the complaints began to roll in, and Paetec's IP address space began to get blocklisted, Paetec began backtracking, trying to invoke their standard AUP close, and Monsterhut responded by taking them to court.

  11. Re:Why legal docs are padded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    That's just despicable! On two counts!

    1) That court reporters outright own the copyright to transcripts -- this is one case where work-for-hire makes sense, and one where I'd be glad to have speech-to-text take their jobs.
    2) That they got paid-per-page which was an incentive to churn out crap.

    That kind of shit really pisses me off. I had no idea.

  12. ME TOO--MOD PARENT UP!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Fuck'n hypocrites! I tell ya...

    I didn't solicite your fucking webhosting offer!

    Get off my lawn!!!!!!

  13. He made the trains run on time by Convergence · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Heh.. What a chance that I just got involved with a similar discussion on NANOG.. About the real costs of Spam. (So far, only one person has given me anything approaching a number. Paul Vixie himself dodged the question for how much Spam costs.)

    The number, BTW, looks to be about $.00001 to $.0005 per email, and perhaps less for spam.

    But, anyways.. Keep in mind that the cure may be worse than the disease.. Spam sucks, spam is annoying. But finding the *WRONG* cure for it can be worse than the existance of Spam in the first place!

    Fascism in germany got its inital support because ``It made the trains run on time.'' We must be careful to not support fascists ``because they stop spam.''

  14. Re:Don't Spam On Me. by silentbozo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You overlook those of us with e-mail addresses old enough to pre-date spam. There was no reason to hide or mangle our addresses back then because there were no spam bots, and no spammers. Usenet was actually useful, and open relays were the norm, not the bane of proper netiquette. Hell, you gave your address out and expected people to contact you, not mass-mail ads. When you give your phone out to people, do you expect them to inundate you with telemarketing pitches? Of course not!

    The point? Don't class those of us who get lots of spam because we choose to keep the addresses that we have had for the last 8 years with clueless newbies who don't know how to hide their addresses. We're aware we could use new addresses, but we've chosen to fight for the ones that we've got. All of my addresses are garbled, but goddamn fucking spammers in China, Argentina, and the US are still selling those "million-address" cds, with entries dating back for years, and some of them happen to contain my e-mails, culled from newsgroup postings, documentation, etc. As quickly as I whack-a-mole spammers, others pop us (most are now located in China, either for hosting, or originating - I'd solve 80% of my spam problem if I could just nuke China's connection to the outside world.

    I fight hard to rid the 'net of these parasitic scum, and I resent the idea that it's MY fault that I'm getting spammed! Lay the blame where it lies - with the spammers!!!

    Finally, regarding your comments regarding telemarketers, do you realize that there is a law against calling someone if they don't want to be called? Yet, under your logic, telemarketers should have the right to "market their product." And being irresponsible with one's address (or number.) You ignore random-dialing, which penalizes me for having a phone, and random-address discovery, where dictionaries of likely usernames are matched against domain names to generate addresses, without even having to run a spambot, or collect someone's data from a form.

    Do you use your e-mail for business? Cause if you do, it's got to be a pain to notify all of your clients of your new address...

  15. Re:class action suits by flyhmstr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't forget the problem of inter-country spamming. The amount of spam I get which is sourced from within the UK is next to nil. Chasing the spammers who've forged my domain in the past will require international legal action and very deep pockets.

    --
    -- The Flying Hamster