[Junk]Fax.com Fined $5.4 Million

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.

Comments

some people are just dumb

[Auckerman]

Let's see their business model is illegal. The FCC tells them that it knows what they are doing, it's illegal, and they should stop it. They don't listen. At what point do you NOT beleive the FCC and keep doing it?

Idiot 1: Hey man, let's send some more junk faxes.

Idiot 2: Didn't the FCC say we would get hell if we kept doing that?

Idiot 1: What's the worse they can do? Fine our "company"?!?

Laughter

Idiot 2: I hear the Bamahas are nice this time of year.

Re:Why can't this apply to SPAM?

[CheechBG]

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.

The difference between faxing and emailing ...

[SuperDuG]

See I've seen companies like this hold up medical faxes and important contract faxes before. Because usually these things are a few pages. I also know people who have resorted to turning their fax machines off when they aren't using them because of the huge waste. The other thing that is really annoying is that these machines sometimes get the wrong number and will give those wonderful fax tones in your ear when you pick up the phone.

The damages from faxing are aparent in costs of paper and toner, along with tying up the machine itself. Email while annoying doesn't neccessarily impede you from downloading the rest of your email in a timely manner. The only way I can see a comparison would be if there were more email spams that were attachments that were in the megabytes. Those are always a real treat to download when your on dialup, and I can see where it would be comparable.

Basically this sets a precidence that will be followed in the future. Spammers beware... we can only take so much. Right now I average about 80 spam messages a day. While I just sort them into the trash, it is becoming a trend which is getting rather annoying. And I can attest that quite a few of them all come from the same PLACE, not the same email server. If it's an advertisement for the same sex site then they should be held accountable, last I checked there wasn't any free advertising packages available.

Re:The difference between faxing and emailing ...

[Steve B]

Email while annoying doesn't necessarily impede you from downloading the rest of your email in a timely manner.

Spam e-mail can fill an in-box memory allotment and cause the loss of legitimate e-mail, just as spam faxes can exhaust a paper roll and buffer and cause the loss of legitimate faxes. The two are exactly analogous.

Spam the Fax Spammers Back

[peterdaly]

I have posted this on slashdot before, but the comment fits the article.

They will hate me for putting this idea into people's minds...but everyone I explain this to gets a kick out of it, so here goes.

1. Take 5 sheets of black construction paper.
2. Scotch tape them into a single 5 sheet long sheet.
3. Place start of "page" into fax machine.
4. Dial the "recipient".
5. Watch sheet start going into the fax machine with glee.
6. Once out the other side, Scotch Tape beginning of "sheet" to end of sheet forming a giant black loop.
7. Giggle like a teenage girl and show your co-workers. Trust me, the showing co-workers step is needed for the full satisfaction. Choose co-workers carefully.
8. You Are Done! Not only that, but the recipient is now out of ink or toner.

Not that I have ever done this...but I know someone who has done this to someone who kept sending them spam faxes.

I hold no responsibility for your actions yada yada...

-Pete

READ ME!

[Guppy06]

We have a few major AP articles on the state of spam today and where it's going, plus we have this tidbit hitting the national news.

This is an election year in the US!

Print out these articles and mail them off to your congresscritter and your class II senator if you have one. Include a letter talking about how spam is an issue to you and how you'd like to see things like this happen to junk e-mailers as well. Maybe talk about how similar the two are (using the recipients expensive communications equipment without permission or reimbursemet). Mail some letters off to anybody else running for those seats that you know of.

Write them! Now! You don't even have to get up off your asses for this one! Just open the damned StarWrite window and write!

Freedom to ignore

[nuggz]

You should be free to say pretty much whatever you want.
I should not have to pay for your speech.

When you fax me, I have to pay for your speech, unless I agree to do so, this is theft.

Free speech is not absolute, Trade secrets, NDA's, treason, libel, slander, fraud and any number of other things are "speech" but that doesn't permit you to do them either.

Let Evil Fight Evil.

[pb]

Here's a sure-fire way to confound junk faxers and spammers alike:

1) Harvest phone numbers from spam e-mails and e-mails from junk faxes. (you can find these online)

2) Figure out where spammers and faxers get their information from and flood these locations with the e-mails and phone numbers you find; USENET and message boards (like slashdot!) are good for this.

3) Wait for the faxers to start faxing the spammers, and for the spammers to start e-mailing the faxers.

Problem solved.

Why the FAX law was important

[standards]

Clearly, a $500 fine per unsolicited fax is a lot of money now... and in 1991, when the law was passed.

But imagine a world where this law didn't exist. There would be many many more organizations that spam fax materials to every number they can find. IN the end, the FAX would become a useless device, where there would be 99% noise and only 1% light.

Therefore, congress passed this law to protect such forseen abuse. At the time, FAX machines were the next great electronic technology, and they had to be protected to be a success.

Now email is on the verge of failure. Many people get 10, 20 or more unsolicited email advertisements per legitamate business correspondence. Clearly, such misuse of email infrustrutre is damaging this new technology. Children can no longer use email due to the pornography advertisements; business people must wade through dozens of junk messages to find the important ones.

Therefore, congress should act now to protect this new and cost-saving technology. Otherwise, it'll be too late, and email will fall out of favor with the business world.

My workplace gets fax spam

[vandelais]

that requests that you fax your interest back to them.

Step 1) find black construction paper at your workplace.
Step 2) write "Stop Spamming" in stencil on white paper
Step 3) Cut out message and tape to black construction paper
Step 4) fax back message that uses a shitload of recipient's fax toner

Step 5) Smile and enjoy the rest of day.

Is it possible to slow down a fax transmission?

[Dahan]

I got tired of junk faxes wasting my paper, so I switched to using a fax modem and Hylafax. I still get a lot of junk faxes, but at least I can rm them.

Anyways, it'd be kinda fun if it was possible to somehow detect a junk fax (maybe an empty TSID is good enough? All the legit faxes I get have a TSID) and then deliberately try to keep the faxer on the line as long as possible, running up their phone bill. Force the modem to 300 baud or something like that :) Maybe request retransmissions too (I don't know if faxes even support that). So is this possible?

About spam email...

[slykens]

Fortunately my office doesn't receive too many of these types of faxes, and if we do I don't see them.

Quite a few people are asking how to apply something like this to email spam. My suggestion is to use whatever anti-spam law may exist on the books in your state and sue the advertiser named in the spam. File it in small claims court, then subpoena their advertising records to prove the purchase of service from the spammer. Even if the suits are thrown out we're still talking about a cost of several hundred dollars per suit to the advertiser. At some point it would have to become more expensive to defend the advertising than to stop it.

That really is the key here, to make it more expensive to advertise this way than not, and ideally the law should make both the company advertised and the spammer liable. That together with a spam email being prima facia evidence of the crime placing the burden of proving the spam was sent without the advertiser's knowledge on them.