Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Fights to Weaken Washington Anti-Spam Law
An anonymous reader writes "According to the Seattle Times, Microsoft (probably their MSN arm) is pushing for a change in at least Washington's anti-spam law. Some analysts claim that the changes contain holes that will allow Microsoft to be exempt from the law." Odd that Microsoft is simultaneously trying to stop spam sent to Hotmail users, and to make sure that it can send unsolicited commercial email without penalties.
Odd that Microsoft is simultaneously trying to stop spam sent to Hotmail users, and to make sure that it can send unsolicited commercial email without penalties.
No, it's not. Laws that apply to everyone but you are very handy.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Odd that Microsoft is simultaneously trying to stop spam sent to Hotmail users, and to make sure that it can send unsolicited commercial email without penalties.
That's not odd at all. That's just how microsoft works. They want to protect their monopoly, and perhaps extend it to new products (Microsoft Brand Penis enlargers anyone?).
Microsoft has never played by the rules before, I don't know why anyone would think they'd start doing it now. . .
I don't think it's odd that microsoft is fighting spam, and at the same time sending it... come on... think about it...
:P
1. We advertise MSN/Hotmail as anti-spam...
2. We spam the living snot out of every other ISP on the planet
3. We put neat little check boxes on our web based email pages that say "ULTIMATE ANTI_SPAM FILTER" and the like
4. Everyone switches to MSN/Hotmail
5. Profit.
So you see Microsoft has it all planned out...
QED...
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
Who do they think they are? Congressmen?! No loophole for you!
Does Microsoft send out a lot of spam? I haven't gotten much MS spam, and you'd think that having an insurmountable monopoly would preclude the necessity for spamming. I mean, where can they go from the top? That's right, down. And that's where angering their customers with spam could take them.
Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
laws that just apply to me. Such as the proposed Travis-Goodspeed-is-excempt-from-the-DMCA-and-EULA s Act of 2003.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Does MS activly court spammers? Does MS actually SELL it's OWN SUBSCRIBER LISTS to spammers? This doesn't make any sense to me, unless MS will soon start spamming everyone on the planet to buy XP, Office 2k3, and all 12 million unsold copies of MS Bob. On the plus side, that would make MS more hated by the general public ;)
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Just like Microsoft to do this. On one hand, they want to fight spam. On the other hand, if they aren't successful fighting it (or at least somewhat effective), then they don't want to be responsible for the consequences.
Just like anyone who charges $$$ for software, but ducks responsibility when it has flaws, risks, and other defects. This activity only helps their cause by letting them cover their asses if they can't do it.
Odd that Microsoft is simultaneously trying to stop spam sent to Hotmail users, and to make sure that it can send unsolicited commercial email without penalties.
Odd? Hardly. Microsoft feels it is above the standard of most Good Corporate Citizens because they have a monopoly. Remember when MS' updater said no info would be sent back to MS? Well just have a look at what XP is sending back to MS for an example of their power-crazed mindset.
Trolling is a art,
But it would also carve out a broad exemption in the law for mail sent by companies the recipient has done business with, and completely exempt Internet service providers -- including Microsoft. Yeah, that's not a hole. How hard would it be for a spammer to start a side business of being an isp to get around this? And since Microsoft only "done business" with practically everyone who's ever bought or used a computer (I'm sure someone out there is weaning their kids on *nix, but the rest of us...), that means free spam all day every day from our "partner".
Why the heck are so many groups trying so hard to preserve a form of advertising that no one pays attention to?
I swear, if the Internet didn't boom so quickly, banner ads might still have been looked upon as a viable outlet for advertising. I mean really, what makes banner ads so much worse than radio ads? I ignore radio and TV ads just as easily by changing the channel. The only advertising worth a damn was the small posters on the railroad. I'll be damnned if each and every one of those ads weren't burned into my memory from staring at them during my hour commute each way, 5 days a week.
MS sells hotmail info to marketers. That means MS profits by selling my email address to spammers. If spammers are constrained, so is a prime MS revenue channel.
How is that kind of obvious scheme odd, except in that it is allowed to exist in the first place...
Remember, investing in MS is risking having your own money used against you in the marketplace.
If Microsoft is allowed to rail-road this legislation through, what does that mean for the the integrity of consumer rights? A company that was sued by the government should not have a hold over it.
Just because someone has done business with a company doesn't mean that they want gobs of mail that they didn't ask for. Transactions don't entitle a company to move into a person's life.
Brought to you by the Artificial Idea Factory.
sex
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
Commercial speech is not protected by the First Amendment. Thus, we need not think spam laws are bad, ever.
Now, say it to the reps in Washington State before they let Microsoft out of the cage to devour all of us.
Anyone got the emails for these people?
In space, no one can hear you moo.
DR GODWIN ADAMS.
NIGERIA NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION (NNPC)
20B IKOYI CRESCENT, LAGOS NIGERIA.
E-mail godwinadams@hotmail.com
TEL-FAX- 234 -01- 7744315
RE:URGENT & CONFIDNTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL...
Error encountered in IAWebSig.clsSig.Create: Last Procedure: sPrc_Ins_tblSig
My guess is that they don't even know that they are fighting aginst themselves. That would be typicial of a large organization.
Ted
Fantasy remains a human right; we make in our measure and in our derivative mode... -- JRR Tolkien
Anyone ever noticed that Microsoft is the exact opposite of big and hard?
There's spam on MSN/Hotmail ? Just what are you talking about? I'll show you, just lemme open my old account... ...omg
is the reduction from $500 to $10. For $500, it's actually worth it to try to track the spammers down and sue his ass. But no one is going to go through that much trouble for just $10, unless their time is completely worthless.
Not to mention the whole "previous business relationship" is total BS. Companies swap email address lists and call each other 'partners'. It's a bunch of crap. I think they ought to rase the fee to $5000. Make it worth someone's time to sue.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
When criminal pays police to look the other way while they commit a crime. Only here, the criminal is Microsoft and their pricey lawyers who are oogling the boys in Washington. This IS news, something new because I don't want this country to be like half the others that allow corrupt governors, policemen, ETC.
I suggest you read Slashdot
from Bill Gates as the Borg, to Bill Gates as Judge Dredd...
"I don't break the law... I am the law!!"
Erm... on second thought, scratch that... might be too close to the truth to be funny.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
Here's my take:
The "done business" change is iffy. The justification is probably that it allows a company who sold a defective product to contact their customers with information on a security patch, or whatever. I can see how Microsoft would feel that such communications would be absolutely necessary for their business.
However, it also allows every FlyByNight company I ever ordered RAM from to send me spam without repercussions.
I don't like the broad opening, but I think some exemption should be allowed for messages that concern failings in a product that I've already purchased.
The ISP change is less iffy. I don't get much spam directly from ISPs. All it needs is a clause that specifies that the ISP can only send messages that directly concern the details of their customer's current account. So, sending a warning about a violation of the terms of use should be fine. Advertisements about additional services such as domain name registration should contain the ADV: tag.
So, that's my opinion. The changes Microsoft is lobbying for are bad, but they could be motivated by reasonable goals. I hope Washington State lawmakers can find a way to address the goals without providing such gaping holes in the spam laws.
I used to be a narrator for bad mimes. (wright)
Microsoft applies for spam patent.
Love Music? Got a Band? Are you a Label? http://garageradio.com
1) Establish business relationship with all customers.
2) Spam all customers.
3) ???
4) Profit!
paintball
Actually a Microsoft monopoly on spam would not be a bad thing. For starters there's something to be said for keeping the number (if not the size) of your enemies limited. Let Microsoft have their loopholes and let them go after the spam market with the intensity they've handled other "competitors" in previous areas.
If you were a spammer and you knew you were going to be in the proverbial sights of either the government or Microsoft which one do you think you would stand a better chance with? Microsoft would eat you alive and could do so in ways the government couldn't even approach (though it apparently isn't above looking the other way when they do it)
If they controlled as high a percentage of spam market as they do PC operating systems then it would be simple enough once they got their monopoly in place to crush 90+% of the spam by taking out one player. Actually getting them once they have it would be tough I admit but at least you would know exactly where to look.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Who modded this interesting? This is a shill to sell the information that is so tantalizingly described in the first three pages of the linked website. Then they tell you you've got to pay (and the pay page is in German!). Other than that, there's no content besides that satisfying MS dyspepsia that is so well received here. Go ahead and read the parent post again. See? Nothing there!
This (parent) post is SPAM and nothing more! I hope I get to meta-mod this! Moderators... please read the articles, read the posts, and READ THE LINKS! (well, unless the link is to that horrid goatsx site!)
Everything I've ever learned the hard way was based on a statistically invalid sample.
I wonder how their ISP exemption is worded. If I, as Joe Spammer, buy at T1 from a provider (say UUNet), and spam off it 24/7, but I also have one hosting customer on the line, then I am an ISP. Am I at this point exempt by their law?
Little mis-wordings leave big loopholes. Most of the spammers that I've talked to buy fairly big lines (T3's, 100Mb/s dedicated, etc, etc), and usually have at least one box hosted with them for whatever reason. Not by design, usually as favors to friends, but they're still providing an Internet Service (ISP = Internet Service Provider).
The company I work for, we buy huge amounts of bandwidth, and for the most part host ourselves.. Does that qualify us to send spam? We don't, and know our customers don't like it, and our provider wouldn't allow it (I've talked to our providers abuse guy several times on other issues, but I already know he's hard against), so we never will, but by that new law we should use our new-found ability.
I wonder if the market for toner cartridges and hair growth formula are really that good.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Okay...Microsoft does a lot of business with a lot of people in a lot of ways and it would be very easy for them to get sued over something they may have accidentally signed up for, etc...
:)
For this I could see the "prior relationship" reasoning - much like the current telemarketting stuff.
However, the ISP part doesn't make much sense, unless they wanna be able to send tons of junk mail to their MSN subscribers about other MS junk.
Either way - a) how hard would it be for a spammer to forge a database showing how recipient a had clicked on a web site and signed up b) act as an ISP (yeah...we have 2 subscribers, but we're an ISP) and spam away.
Then again, I'm one of those old folk who remember the Internet before business took hold
I've encountered the same situation with Earthlink. Because I use a DDNS service (whyi.org), because they cannot do a reverse lookup (the reverse zone belongs to my ISP), they bounce my messages as spam. At the same time, I was getting voluminous amounts of spam from their users.
However, trying to steer the lawmaking apparatus, no doubt with bribe^H^H^H^H charitable donations to our elected officials is very very low...
--Storm
I've been spammed many times from MSN, and from other spammers hiding out in the Redmond Empire's IP range. I've had their entire set of IP ranges in our mail server's 'Deny' list for nearly two years. No regrets whatsoever.
/etc/tcp.smtp file, and recompile it.
For those who want to do similarly, and who run their own mail servers, let me save you a little research.
If you run qmail or a similar package with rblsmtpd, make the following entry in the
207.46.:allow,RBLSMTPD="Microsoft: Access denied." (Or whatever text you want in there).
There are other domains. You may want to add:
207.68.128-207.:allow,RBLSMTPD=(Text as above).
65.52-55.:
213.199.144-159.:
For those using postfix, simply add these to your client_check and sender_check lists, and recompile with postmap.
microsoft.com 554 Go away, Bill. (or whatever you want to say).
msft.net 554 (whatever you want to say)
msn.com (if desired)
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
You bring up the very good point that our system is flawed in that businesses, rather than people control the government.
It is also important to remember that the opposite extremes (socialism and communism) suck in that the community exploits the individual. Corporations, despite their wanton disregard for human rights are still bound by the laws of profit. We need to start taking advantage of this.
For example, start a petition for network admins that would allow Office attachements if, and only if, the spec was publicly released. If enough of us, the ones that control mail servers, do this it could force M$ into releasing the spec to save Office's viability.
Winshit boycotts would not work. We are not the sort of people who buy winshit, we are either boycotting it for ethical reasons of using a warez copy.
The Warez industry has been decimated by the OSS movement. Who would want to hurt a good ol' honest business like that!?
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Looked at one way, Microsoft is only trying to limit their legal liability for something that they are too lazy, too uninterested, or too incompetent to stop on their own.
It's a matter of control without responsibility. The measures that the article mentions are as draconian as spam is loathsome. The measure provides a penalty of a thousand dollars per message sent and it is bound to bankrupt anyone caught doing it; essentially providing the equivalent of a class-suit in a can.
This is a very effective measure against spam as written, but even a penalty as severe as the one mentioned would be only an inconvenience to Microsoft which would be made to pay for their taste for expansion with real risks under a law that provided effective penalties against spam.
Once more, the topic is control without responsibility and there is nothing surprising about Microsoft, a company that writes Petri dishes into its software and doesn't take them out after years of exploits, wanting special exemptions for the next time they are fooled, hacked, or get a wild-hair that makes them do what back-alley creeps resort to.
To mail me, remove the 'mailno' from my email addy.
"Yeah. It smells, too..."
Odd that Microsoft is simultaneously trying to stop spam sent to Hotmail users, and to make sure that it can send unsolicited commercial email without penalties.
Microsoft does an ok job at Hotmail, but there is one thing that it misses - itself.
My mail is set to exclusive on Hotmail, meaning if you are not on my safe list, your mail gets dumped into my Junk Mail folder. Seven day old messages get erased from Junk Mail permanently. This applies to all emailers, except Microsoft, whose 75KB Hotmail ads trying to promote paying for more services show up in my Inbox, not Junk Mail. I have to manually delete these.
Two things I want changed at Hotmail:
1. Microsoft better learn how to filter itself. Properly.
2. Junk Mail should not contribute to my space usage on Hotmail. If I get a lot of spam, Hotmail sends me a message saying to erase it, flooding it further. God forbid I fet another ad. When you have 2MB of space, and Junk Mail counts towards it, 50KB hurts. It wouldn't hurt to make the initial page after logging in say in big red letters "Erase some mail, dammit!"
Quantum Skyline
You forgot the most important step in any high-tech venture:
5. ??????
6. Profit!
Engineering and the Ultimate
It seems to be a common belief that it is okay to send anything you want to anyone you have a prior business relationship with. Fuck that. If I buy stuff off someone, it does not mean that I want them to pester the hell out of me so I can buy more stuff.
It passed the Senate but never passed the House of Representatives... It's cited by spammers in order to trick you that the spam is legitimate and that you can't do anything about it. See link here.
sounds like microsoft is forseeing a large market in selling advertising to their customers.
here's the senario:
spammer wants to send mail to all hotmail or msn (or both) users. spammer gives microsoft money, and then is able to send them "legal" spam. the spam doesn't stop, microsoft just gets richer in the process, and probably pays off a few politicians.
vote the bastards out.
Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
You apparently cannot read, I said that there were legitimate classes of bulk email sender. I did not say there were legitimate classes of bulk unsolicited email senders.
The term bulk email sender is a term of art in the world of anti-spam measures. It is used by Microsoft, AOL, CNET and others to refer to themselves.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
When I had a hotmail account, yes I was young and foolish, 90% of the spam originated from msn, microsoft and hotmail. It would seem to me if they stopped spamming everyone that would take care of their spamming problem on the hotmail servers.
Well, this one's simple.
1. My current telephone provider calls me, trying to sell something.
2. I tell them that if they ever call me again without a GOOD reason, I switch to a DIFFERENT phone provider.
3. They haven't called me since.
-Amalcon
Scott Hazlegrove is the Microsoft lobbyist they are talking about.
Here is Scott Hazlegrove, "environmental policy director with the Association of Washington Business" arguing against stepped penalties for river poluters, instead he wants a nice flat fee (which would favour the bigger poluters over the little ones).
http://www.crcwater.org/fish/npfish35.html
Here he is as a Surefoot customer:
"I am writing to express my thanks and appreciation for the first decently fitting ski boots I have ever worn.", "I wouldn't think of buying a pair of boots anywhere else."http://www.surefoot.com/surefoot_-_customer_letter s.html
Here he is at his lobbying firm (this page has disappeared from the site, but google still has it):
The google cache link
The bill in question has been referred to the Senate Technology & Communications Committee. The sponsors of the bill happen to be all of the members of the committee, which sounds to me as if the Chairman (Sen. Esser, whose district includes Redmond), has smiled on it rather heavily. It has not had a hearing yet, nor is it scheduled for a hearing the next time the committee meets (27 February). There are just a few weeks left for bills to have hearings in the committees, so it's possible that the purpose of the bill has been served just by submitting it, and there is no further interest in actually passing the bill.
OTOH, it just may not have come up for the hearing yet for other reasons, and it's not safe to assume that it's dead at this point in time when the entire committee sponsored it. So, for those who might be interested in knowing what to do, here are some ideas:
When contacting Senators, please have something short and intelligent to say. If you are going to testify at the hearing, that goes double. MS lobbyists are going to be slick, and if the opponents of the bill look like a bunch of hicks or idiots, the contrast is going to be noticeable. There are more good ideas on how to testify on the legislature's website.
Dunno where this quote came from, but whoever made it is a bit out of touch. The "warez industry" is flourishing - it's never been easier to acquire pirated software.
Please forgive my ignorance if I am so.
/.), but wouldn't that be the best way to solve this problem without getting government involved.
But I believe the answer to fighting spam is in petitioning ISPs, mail server developers, standards organizations, network admins, etc. to come up with and implement identity verification and forged mail header detection into their products so that spammers cannot hide behind fake information.
It appauls me that I can so easily fake information in mail headers that SHOULD NOT be fakeable.
Yes it would suck and be a pain in the ass to transition (as many have mentioned here on
What do we need to do to get this started, and if it already is, where can I go to sign up?
Reading this bit about Washington's law, then the Internet Week article "AOL, Microsoft Unleash Lawyers On Spammers" att icle .jhtml?articleID=6900409
http://www.internetweek.com/security02/showAr
makes me think Microsoft is anti-spam only when convenient (or only if they can make money from their stance?)
"The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." --Harlan Ellison
One of MSN 8's chief selling points is precisely the fact that it blocks SPAM (or allows the user to "beef-up" their junkmail blocking profile). Take away the SPAM, and you take away the selling point. People might as well go for AOL...
I am alone, yet I also surf the universal backwash of undifferentiated Being, which is LOVE.