Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

[Junk]Fax.com Fined $5.4 Million

Posted by michael on from the sometimes-you-do-get-what-you-deserve dept.

Satanboy writes "This article states that a record $5.4m fine was levied on Fax.com after blatantly ignoring requests by the FCC to discontinue the activity of sending unsolicited faxes. This is similar to actions CmdrTaco posted about earlier." The people at junkfax.org are apparently planning a large class-action suit against fax.com as well.

6 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why can't this apply to SPAM? by CheechBG · · Score: 5, Informative

    Simple. The damages in fax blasting as they apply to the consumer are quantitative, a somewhat measurable decrease in toner, paper expense, stuff like that. Bandwidth, especially how much quantitative bandwitdh the inet spammers consume, is not that easily determined. Congress decided to tackle the easier problem, which still got a major nuisance off our backs. I recall at a old job that I was at as a tech how many junk faxes we received for all sorts of stuff.

  2. Meanwhile, that law is found unconstitutional... by bons · · Score: 3, Informative

    Article
    ruling Kuro5hin thread on the subject

    --

    No Zen is good zen

  3. Re:Spammers by capologist · · Score: 2, Informative
    They really need to superscede it with a law that bans advertisement in all cases where the caller does not foot the bill of the communication -- i.e. making only telemarketing and junk mail legal.

    In some cases, the caller doesn't really foot the bill for telemarketing, either. In particular, I'm talking about telemarketing via recorded messages.

    This practice is very much like spam. When I receive such a call, it consumes my time--if only a few seconds--to interrupt what I'm doing, answer the phone, recognize it for what it is, and hang up. (If I'm not home when the call arrives, I end up going through the same process with my answering machine.) The caller doesn't expend human time making each individual call, but is consuming human time on the callee's end. Overall, the cost to the callee is probably higher than the cost to the caller.

    It's worth noting that in my state (Arizona), this practice is illegal. Nevertheless, I receive such calls frequently.

  4. Re:Spam the Fax Spammers Back by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most FaxSpammers do not originate from a fax machine. They would use a PC or a bank of PCs to send hundreds of faxes simultaneously.

    On a related note, wouldn't it seem to you that the fax machine software gurus know about your "Mobeus Fax"? Now, as a programmer, if you know about a specific attack, don't you close the hole? On most machines, the local buffer holds a scan of all the pages BEFORE the machine even dials. Your machine may differ.

    --
    I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  5. Re:Why can't this apply to SPAM? by jmooney · · Score: 3, Informative
    Heads up: It is not just faxes and spam to your PC. In Japan there was a major problem with spam email to mobile phones (that costs a lot more than spam email to your PC), and the latest problem is millions of spam hang-up calls to mobile phones - enough to severely overload the network. See this Infoworld article today.

    The scam: the spammer pays nothing for the cell calls since no-one answered. The target sees a "missed call" with an unfamiliar caller ID number, they call back and get a phone sex line. In doing so they incur at least cell phone charges plus the operators use anything else they can to persuade/intimidate people to pay more to the operator for the "service".

    This is really large scale, and unlike the US Japan already had rules preventing phone email spam:

    ... the volume of calls started rising at around 10 a.m. in the morning and within 15 minutes the carrier had been forced to place a 50 percent curb on the number of calls that could be made, to keep the network operating. The disruption, which lasted for several hours and affected more than 5 million telephone lines, was traced to a one-giri operator that began making more than 4,000 calls every three minutes over roughly 200 telephone lines.

    For Japan's cell-phone users, the rise in one-giri calls came just as they were getting relief from another annoyance: unwanted e-mail. A new law prohibiting mass e-mailing to random cell phone users went into effect on July 1.

  6. Re:Spammers by capologist · · Score: 2, Informative
    Can you explain what laws you're referring to?

    Arizona Revised Statues 44-1278:
    ...

    B. It is an unlawful practice pursuant to section 44-1522 for any seller or solicitor or anyone acting on their behalf who conducts a telephone solicitation in this state to do any of the following:
    ...

    4. Make a telephone call to any residential telephone using an artificial or prerecorded voice to deliver a message unless the call is initiated for emergency purposes or the call is made with the prior express consent of the called party.