Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft and the SPAM Game
The Seattle Times reported a while ago that Microsoft is pushing for Washington State Senate Bill 5734 which will overturn most of Washington State's laws that specify monetary penalties for companies who send out spam. This will completely exempt ISPs from current Washington spam laws, which Microsoft just happens to be. It seems that they are jumping the gun a bit. They are having a company named Digital Impact (save that address for you spam filters) send the email for them. Thankfully I live in Seattle so maybe I can collect an easy $500 before Microsoft guts the current law.
Instead of Micro-soft, they are very soft, as in Micro-so-soft
Slash-dodo-dot.
Is that a skin cream? Micro-so-soft!
I rejoice that there are owls.
Leave it to Microsoft to find a way to overturn existing spam laws in order to bother you on a daily basis.
First they invade Userfriendly, now even Slashdot has advertisements for them, now they are going to spam us directly. I wonder if you use that stupid MSN spam filter to filter them out, if it would do it. Maybe it "accidently" lets them through. Hmm...anyone try it?
JoeLinux
Arguing on the internet is like winning the special olympics: even if you win, you're still retarded.
This will completely exempt ISPs from current Washington spam laws, which Microsoft just happens to be.
So Microsoft, aka Micrososoft, just happens to be a Washington spam law, or maybe you meant they happen to be an ISP? Nice job.
It's a good thing for Microsoft that Hotmail isn't an ISP...
Come on now. Spam is so old school. It's legacy. The wave has already crested.
Why can't they come up with some new inovative way to plaster ads in front of internet users? These people control the desktop, and 99% of the browser market after all.
At least companies like Gator offered new and different technology to monetize the users.
Microsoft is better than this. I never thought they would have to stoop as low as sending spam. They must really be hurting for new cashflow sources to impress "The Street."
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
Soon they'll replace that cuddly bear as the spokesperson for Snuggle dryer sheets with Bill Gates. Staticy-ness in clothes will go up 75%.
Thankfully I live in Seattle so maybe I can collect an easy $500 before Microsoft guts the current law.
I also live in Washington state, and I can tell you from experience: collecting the $500 will not be easy. Here are the ideal conditions for a lawsuit (taken from the Peacefire webpage, which I have been a member of for four years now):
* The defendant is a corporation, and you know the state where they are incorporated. (Usually, the state where they're incorporated is either the state where they're located, or Delaware -- because Delaware makes it easy to incorporate there.) Legally, a company cannot use "Corporation" or "Inc." or "Incorporated" anywhere, unless they really are a corporation -- but that won't tell you where they're incorporated, or even if they're incorporated in the U.S. Unfortunately, with most spam, you can't even find out the name of the company that sent it, much less whether they're a corporation.
* You can easily prove one of the following (one of these conditions must be satisfied to show that the spam violated the law):
* The sender address ("From:") or return address ("Reply-To:") was forged. If you get mail from an address that looks blatantly forged, like "98of292h38h2r@hotmail.com", send a blank message to that address, and keep the error message that comes back to you saying that there is no such address. This can be used to prove, in court, that the spammer violated Washington's anti-spam law by forging the return address. The subject line was "misleading". This is a subjective determination, one that will ultimately be made by the judge. One of the spammers that I'm suing, sent me an advertisement with the subject line "Shareholder request", which I considered blatantly misleading since Peacefire doesn't even have "shareholders". (The gist of the advertisement was, "You will look good in your shareholder's eyes if you use our product.")
You have registered your address with the WAISP (http://registry.waisp.org/) registry -- to sue a spammer under Washington's law, you have to be able to show that there was some way for the spammer to determine that you lived in Washington.
More power to you if you can collect the $500, but it's a tough road ahead.
It's cool to bash Microsoft everywhere.
How can you fundamentally weaken a law that's unenforceable in the first place?
I came up with the ultimate solution for spam: spam.thatgeek.com.
Every time I get a piece of spam, I put the email address of the spammer on this website. Then, when the spammers' email-collecting programs hit my page, the spammers' addresses get into their own databases!
The hunters become the hunted! If others would do the same, no one would ever dare spam a geek ever again.
I am John Doe, loyal employee of Microsoft. I seek the assistance of someone who is genuinely interested in entering into a business relationship with me. As you know, Bill Gates was the ruler of Microsoft before quietly resigning a few years back. Corrupt governments deemed his business illegal, and as a result, his business accumulated assets were frozen.
I therefore seek your assistance in providing a safe and genuine bank account to temporarily store my leader's rightfully owned assets. For your assistance, 0.01% of his assets ($2.76 Million Dollars) will be left in your account as payment.
Note that there is no risk for you or your family, but keep this correspondence private, as this is a matter of great secrecy. As soon as we receive your letter of acceptance/acknowledgement/, I shall give you more on this transaction.
Doing the Right Thing should not be preempted by making a buck.
Kind of brings the phrase "internet appliance" to a whole new level, doesn't it?
Frankly it sounds like a good bill, and just because MS is supporting it doesnt mean you shouldnt.
Do you want the laws to lead down a path where your ISP is financially liable for your actions? Because that road goes to the place where your ISP turns over audited logs of everything you've done to avoid liabilities.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Yep. Slashdot has a sheep mentality regarding Microsoft.
1. Say negative things about Microsoft
2. If anyone dissents from the negative Microsoft opinion, accuse them of working for Microsoft.
It's just stupid, and it pisses me off; if people could back their anti-Microsoft rhetoric up with facts, it wouldn't bother me, but 99% of the time, it's just morons following the herd. BAA!
evil adrian
Later on this post will not make any sense, but in the original post of the article, MS is spelled "Micrososoft". It will no doubt be fixed, and the parent will be modded as OT.
It's funny in the context. Please mod parent up.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
> Title: Micrososoft and the spam game
heh, so so so soft, even viagra can't help them.
Nothing more needs to be said.....
That will make Washington St. a spam haven state where people from all over can set up by ISP space to spam as many people at will without fear of retribution. *Leaves Microsoft comments to the trolls* (ah, just one) I don't believe Bill Gates is the devil, there is just an inherent relationship between people who speak the same language! :-)
Trolling is fun, lets everyone reply to this so we can be lame, and keep it going
How many people have actually gotten spam from Microsoft? I get a few newsletters which I can unsubscribe to at any time. I get very infrequent mails (once every month or two) which are generally pretty targeted to my interests, I think most of them have an opt out.
This sounds like the way "spam" should be sent - target, restrained, and with the option to opt out. I don't see a problem.
What experience have other people had?
Read reviews of shopping cart software
You idiot, noone is going to follow through with that .... oh, I guess I forgot where I was ;-D
Why don't they just obey the law if they want to send spam? Spam isn't illegal in WA, just forging the header or providing a misleading title. If they'd send mail on the up-and-up, there's no problem.
Taken from the WA lawbook, it's illegal when it:
(a) Uses a third party's internet domain name without permission of the third party, or otherwise misrepresents or obscures any information in identifying the point of origin or the transmission path of a commercial electronic mail message; or
(b) Contains false or misleading information in the subject line.
And my thinking microsoft is something which I dislike; being a corportion known for its poor software and monopolistic practices; is something which is totally following the crowd? I express my dislike for their practices; regardless of insight. It doesn't take a genius to say microsoft is shit; no sir. And I'd have to say its fairly obvious that microsoft is not someone you would wish to compliment for just making it easier for people to spam. I don't quote rhetoric; I'm too lazy to care what other people think; I develop my own opinions and express them as I see fit. You're probably a fairly pretenious person, from the seeming of your posts; anyone who agrees with the majority must be a sheep and following the crowd.
"Why the fuck does m$ need to spam?"
They don't. What they intend to do is interpose themselves between an advertiser and MSN's captive audience. They want to send other peoples' spam. For profit.
You exercise "piece of shit grammar".
When is the last time you used a Microsoft product? Why was it shitty?
evil adrian
Known for its poor software? By whom, the Slashdot community, which is hardly representative of this thing called the real world? Just because some Slashdot geeks don't like Microsoft doesn't mean their software is poor, sorry. In fact, a lot of their software is quite useful -- just because people think everything should be free doesn't make the software bad.
Monopolistic practices happen, all the time, the companies gets reined in by the gov't. But you don't see the rhetoric when people talk about cable companies, phone companies, power companies, etc., only Microsoft. Curious...
You are jumping to conclusions about my post. I'm not pretentious. But think about why you posted your comment in the first place. It bore no insight; it conveyed no useful information. All you did was jump on the Slashdot bandwagon and yell "Microsoft sucks! Look at me I'm one of you!"
evil adrian
You put some poor unsuspecting sap's e-mail address up to get harvested and slammed, when it's quite likely that the addresses were forged...
and I hate to tell you this, but spam.thatgeek.com sounds like an invitation to me...
Denver Isuzu Suzuki
You might want to seek professional help.
Let's take back the internet. Make ISPs responsible for ANY fraudulent email they transmit or relay. Legally reposnsible as in fines and jail terms. Then allow companies to send out unsolicited email provided the have a reasonable opt-out policy. Primary sellers only, email lists just for the sake of emailing people should be made illegal.
Then I think you have the problem solved. ISPs aren't going to allow just anyone to use their mail servers, esp. companies who go through a foriegn ISP, if the ISP here may be held accountable for anything passing through their systems (and take metaphore that anyway you like). Then only reputable companies w/ a recognized opt-out policy can send email. (Make the FCC or the FCT or some big government commitee decide who is "recognized".)
Big, reputable companies can be dealt with. I'm not scared of them. It's the creeps who hide behind anonymity and pedal trash that I want to get.
(And I know what an open relay is and why some mistaken people feel they have a need to run one. I don't care. I don't care about your frickin email server or your frickin (fake) political causes or frickin what not. You people with open servers are as bad as the spammers themselves.)
Or maybe for a loss. It is Microsoft after all.
Imagine the power they could weild if they put most of the other spammers out of buisness.
The current law can be found here. A report on a successfully prosecuted case can be found here. If one reads either, it's easy to see that the current law only applies to fraudulent headers.
Given that the current law only covers fraudulent headers, I doubt that Microsoft is maliciously trying to destroy the current law.
However, last year the senate introduced bill 6568 which extended the old law to require that commercial e-mail contain ADV: as the first 4 characters of the subject line. That bill passed the senate with flying colors. Unfortunately, it got locked up in committee in the house and died.
House bill 5734 is a watered down version of last year's senate bill 6568.
I don't like Microsoft much. That said, the story at the Seattle Times is riddled with half-truths and inaccuracies. For example, it claims that 5734 completely exempts ISPs. The senate summary of the bill says
So, ISPs aren't liable for transporting SPAM, as they aren't liable for transporting copyrighted material or child porn. They can still be liable for originating, or aiding in the origination, of spam. I think that's a reasonable exemption.I'd be really interested in knowing whether lobbyists that are partially funded by Microsoft also supported senate bill 6568 from last year. If so, this is definitely unjustified Microsoft bashing. However, if their lobbyists locked it up in the house then we can villify them for weakening a good bill.
Too bad the article doesn't comment on that, and I don't have a way to find out.
I used to be a narrator for bad mimes. (wright)
Why would they support a bill, when they complain that 80% of the mail on hotmail is spam. They just encourage it more. If they start spamming, will this stop them from putting butterflys all over NYC? Maybe we could just shoot MS's advertising dept. Then shoot the guy who came up with the idea to support this bill.
This article confuses me. Microsoft is sending out spam, though this is not legal in washington at the moment? Is that the point?
Is Microsoft spam normal? I've never recieved any, despite the fact my e-mail address is on webpages all over the place. Of course, i don't own any MS products, and i've never registered any. Maybe tha'ts how they build their spam target lists.
Microsoft has enough methods for getting their products time in front of your eyes, through Windows Media Player, and virtually every other bundled app within windows, without deluging you with junkmail, but the fact remains that generation of email marketing materials is far cheaper than any other marketing materials except perhaps newspaper ads. Consumer eye-share is a valuable thing, and ther is no better medium than through that through which consumers expect to recieve valuable and meaningful correspondence thus are more likely to focus their attention on as they review what they've recieved. The fact of the matter is, SPAM works. This is our fault as consumers. I've never bought anything based on SPAM I've recieved and I doubt anyone who frequents /. has either, but obviously many consumers have. Say what you will about Microsoft, but the company is a collection of some of the shrewdest business people out there who'll be damned to hell before they abandon a potential marketing channel. It's just good business.
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
Shouldn't that be "The Spam Game" and not "The SPAM Game"? Hormell may not go after every little thing that says "SPAM" anymore, but I think Slashdot should have enough courtesy to not use the all-caps version. Wait... "Slashdot" and "courtesy" in the same sentence... What am I thinking?
"Wow, you're like some kind of superhero able to ward off happiness and success at every turn."
-- Ryan Stiles
Office?
I'm assuming you mean that Windows is a ripoff of MacOS? Let's conveniently forget that the GUI was invented by Xerox, not Apple, right?
Let's use that as a starting point. Your turn.
evil adrian
it's the age-old practice of manufacturing a problem while providing the means to get around the problem. i.e., m$ sends out spam and then sells you their software to prevent spam.
And the prequel
Monopolies, no matter who has them, are bad. It doesn't matter who the company is or what they control.
(scroll down a bit in the discussions for the "rhetoric" and if I really cared, I'd look up examples for cable companies and power companies too, but I don't
Well, I can't speak for him, but I've spent some years developing commercial software for various platforms. Try using TransparentBlt in the win32/16 api and expect consistent behavior in win platforms. You end up writing code specific to win95/win98/winSE/winNT/winXP.
And unix is fragmented. LOL.
I'm not saying that Slashdot ignores other tech companies' monopolies... my point was, any time there IS an article regarding those other companies, the ratio of intelligent-to-asinine posts (e.g. "Oh, it figures that ::insert company name:: would do that, they'd kill my firstborn if it meant a profit.") is much, much lower.
evil adrian
I wonder if after I report this kind of spam to spamcop their ISP will close their uplink.
Anyway, is particulary dumb from Microsoft to do that kind of mail advertising and thru a so known spammer. I know that I never should attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity, but speaking of Microsoft you never know.
I meant higher. Shit. You know, more intelligent posts, less asinine ones... ugh. I really should use that preview button more often.
evil adrian
..like an Anonymous Coward post on Slashdot!
Has anyone else noticed that the site Digital Impact is using PHP. With Microsofts anti-OSS stance you would think that they would steer clear of such 'inferior' technologies since they have .NET
I think this should be taken as a vote from microsoft on OSS.
DSLIP Web Design and Content Management Australia.
Leroy Anderson's character comes shining through in his reply to Linda,
Then he explained the process he went through to put a piece of music fixed in his mind to orchestration. How the part a particular instrument is assigned -- melody, accompaniment, countermelody, etc. -- depends on the music. He enclosed three pieces of his music which he said,I'm asking people to stop posting things just to post things. I'm challenging them to actually use their brains and contribute positively to a discussion.
evil adrian
tubamophones, saxamophones?
This is Slashdot, stuff that matters.
Mostly filled with Microsoft these days.
Is it the only thing that matters now?
MSDOS: 20+ years without remote hole in the default install
i think you killed it...
Microsoft has a mindshare insecurity complex festering in it's bowels?
Spamming, ads in Linux mags, attending the Linux shows?
All in all things might continue to look up!
Blogging because I can...
Tue, 04 Mar 2003 0
4:25:32 -0600
X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
Return-Path:
Received: from HMT3-CLT1.hotmailtest3.com (hmt3-clt1.hotmailtest3.com [64.4.7.32
])
[snip]
Tue, 4 Mar 2003 04:25:31 -0600 (CST)
(envelope-from Phonecalls@nootede.nl)
Received: from mail.nootede.nl ([61.11.79.215]) by HMT3-CLT1.hotmailtest3.com wi
th Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4821);
Tue, 4 Mar 2003 02:38:55 -0800
Message-ID:
To:
From: "Life Savings"
Subject: Life Insurance up to 75% Off. Get a FREE Quote Now! 7
983
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 02:33:09 -2000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
The real tragedy is that billg would do this after being on every spam list in the universe, thanks to me for always using billg@microsoft.com for every request for email.
No, I think you did.
I've had m0.net firewalled off from my mail server for months (maybe years) now due to their incessant spewage of spam.
= UTF-8& oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search
/dev/null
just look here
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=m0.net&ie
The fact that M$ would even consider such a slimey bag of spammers is typical of their unethical monopolistic behavior. Maybe its high time we added all of M$ ip blocks to the various rbl's and see how Uncle Billy feels when his corporate emails start hitting
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
Within 30 seconds of reading this post, my account at the University of Washington got spam from...Microsoft.
what the hell this is? http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=19730&threshol d=-1&commentsort=0&mode=nested&pid=0
this stupid idiot got a +3 funny.. i hope he does.. this is not funny
m0.net is in EVERY good mail admin's personal blacklists. I do mean literally. Amazing. You would think that since it's technically a crime that one could go after Microsoft as the actual culprit, the ones paying the bill.
Where he is dumping spammers through the trapdoor.
Now he asks, "Are you from Digital Impact? Oh, go on in!"
MAKE MONEY FAST!
YOU posted the last post. This means that YOU killed the thread.
No, wait, this is the last post...I killed it.
I didn't mean to kill it. Sorry.
Freedom Email
Before everybody jumps on the bandwagon to castigate the slashdot editors for poor spelling has anybody considered the following:
That it was not a typo but a secretive heads-up to Microsoft changing both their name and business focus/strategy.
That's right!. In the very near future Microsoft is to be known as MicroSoSoft. The new ad campaign will feature, among other things:
*Fluffy white rabbits and ducklings
*Adorable scamps kicking a MicroSoSoft plush football around a park.
*Picnics by beautiful undulating streams.
*The amazing results of MicroSoSoft fabric softener on both whites and colors.
Now lavish your kudos on krow for his timely covert communique. Dissemination for the people!
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.
Given that Microsoft products are on over 90% of all PCs worldwide, would I be correct to read that this would mean the Microsoft could legally send 90% of the world's PCs spam? After all these machines are running a Microsoft OS, thus they must have done business with the Beast.
ANd to cover the last 10% is the ISP clause. So, if you are an ISP, you can legally spam anybody, even if they aren't your customer.
Anybody can use that loophole, really. If I put up a WAP free for the taking by any Joe Schmuckatelli, does this make me an ISP? Does this mean I can spam the world, assuming that I am originating from withing the state of Washington?
All in all, a bad idea.
It has been said here many times, but bears repeating. Legislation against spam will not come to bear any useful fruit. They are like gun laws; they will keep honest people honest. The spammers will simply locate offshore or find other ways to ignore the law. It is the ISPs that need to take a stand against spam for there to be any ground gained.
I started using MailWasher this week, and a key feature that it has is the ability to filter spam that goes through open relays. If such a filter is available at the user level, why not make it an option at the ISP level? An ISP or web-based mail site can give the user the option of blocking all mail that passes through open relays. A slightly less optimal option would be for an ISP to block ALL mail that passes through open relays, but then this gets into the issue of the ISP deciding what goes and what doesn't go through its system--like the discussion regarding AOL's 1-billion-blocks day.
My thoughts on spam for the evening.
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
Well, I like popfile [http://popfile.sourceforge.net] as it works very well, and is easy to use. I've not seen spam in months. A good filter like this makes laws such as the one being discussed less important (though it still takes bandwith to download the spam.) And also, the law is only against falsified headers, I think microsoft can safely use return e-mail addresses.
Not a sentence!
Would you be upset if you got an email you werent expecting announcing Red Hat Advanced Server?
They didnt forge emails. There was no deceptive subject header. You've all owned a microsoft product before, so theres a prior customer relationship. Theres an opt-out link for future emails.
Microsoft sent out a bunch of emails to announce that Win 2003 is ready to go.
The best thing a bunch of outrage and pretend shock can do is lock down the 'net with more government controls. That's just the thing to teach bad ole Bill Gates.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Sign up for a hotmail email account and make sure you uncheck any auto-spam sign ups. Don't give out the address to anyone.
Wait 24-36 hours and count the spam. Should be about 10-20 spams. I think I know exactly where M$ stands on the whole spam issue.
"A mind is a terrible thing to taste."
Hey all, I'm new to Slashdot and I know arguing with your guys' values is not the way to get off to a good start in this kind of community. However, I wonder - is it really nessecary to have a modified picture of Bill Gates based on an obscure Star Trek reference as a 'figurehead' for news items in the Microsoft category? I know you guys hate Microsoft. I don't nessecarily agree with that, though I'm not a n00b and I know there's a lot of evidence against them, but I do accept it. However, personal attacks towards Bill Gates - even humorous ones - seem a little childish to me. How many of you know the man personally? The fact is that as of now, he doesn't actually have a great deal to do with what his company does. It's been a good time since he was actually the CEO. That's not to say that he never has been, I would be idiotic to make such a claim - but until somebody can provide believable evidence that they've met Bill Gates personally and he was as bad as he's said to be, I don't think these kind of things are nessecary. That's just my two cents, though - by all means, keep doing what you're doing ;)
In theory, if you spent enough time working on it (and could make sure you got a LOT of spam, say by even HAVING a hotmail account) you could make a living doing this. Shit, I wish my state (Indiana) had a law like this. I would certainly become a full-on Spam vigilante if I could make $500 per message.
For the cost of a threatening letter/offer to settle, and occasionally an hour or two in court you could certainly reap a nice little income stream.
At least until somebody designs a mail protocol to replace SMTP that isn't so prone to abuse...
Who did what now?
Microsoft just happens to be an anti-spam law? Damn... they're cornering the market on everything.
~SL
I bought one of those MSN Companion puters from Tiger direct a year ago. I signed up for the MSN service (free 6mo) to play with the puter before I nuked the OS. I signed up as "ipaqheat@msn.com". This is not an address that was published, as I have never used it. Within a week of signing up I had a SPAM in the mailbox. The way I see it, Microsoft had to sell my information to a spammer for that to happen. I hold them responsible for it. I've since canceled the account.
I wouldn't necessarily consider what Microsoft is doing means that Microsoft plans to enter the spamming business. It does, however, fit Microsoft's standard operating procedure of creating enormous new security holes while touting them as "innovation". For example: I'm sure we're all familiar with the fact that before Microsoft's brainfart known as Outhouse Express, getting hostile and/or infectious emails just didn't happen. Well, flashbombs might count, but you get the idea. Microsoft has some noble purpose for this, but like usual, they didn't think of obvious consequences.
I personally don't have the time for it, but what might be an idea is to set up a website where people can blacklist the top spammers. Then every day, a number of sites - both of the spammers and of those who gave the order to spam - are hit with a DDOS attack by this anti-spam website's regulars. I know I wouldn't mind having a little program open in the background sending 64 kb pings if it means I can hurt a company in the very online wallet it's trying to fill by filling my personal mailbox with trash.
The advantages are that first off, it doesn't take all that many DDOS'ers to bring down a website. Also they can hardly sue anyone because 1) people from all over the world are involved and international law is a bitch, and 2) It would be more than mildly hypocritical. And who knows? Maybe all those trojan script kiddies would finally do something useful for a change. You could furthermore set it up with increasing returns - e.g. 1st time offenders are hit for an hour, 2nd timers for 12 hours, etcetera. Who knows? We might even beat the bastards at their own game - after all, there's more of us than there are of them.
But maybe something like this already exists? If anyone knows an URL, I for one, would sign right up. If not, maybe others have good extra ideas and tips for the design of such a site? Sooner or later some enterprising php'er is bound to come along, pick this up and spin it into a site... I hope.
Jynx
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it well worth the effort.
Has anyone gotten anyone email asking if they want to sue people who have been sending them spam messages. Does the email say "besides us" in it. Hahahaha.
Don't jump on digital impact too hard. I work for a MAJOR e-commerce site that contracts with Digital Impact. They are very good at sending out large volumes of e-mail reliably. We use them purely for legitimate, non-spam-type e-mails. Sure with time we could write the code to do it ourselves but they specialize in it. I'm not sure what MS has contracted them to do but as much as I hate to say it, it could be on the up and up. Not all high volume e-mails are spam.
As for overturning spam laws I'm skeptical that it is in the public's best interest but Digital Impact does offer valuable services.
* m0.net
/dev/null
Even as recently as last month, MSIE came in 6 out of 6 in a comparison of web browsers. Opera and Mozilla, among others, have it beat by a long shot in all categories (well, Opera costs, but I get my boss to pay). It's even documented in U.S. Federal Court records that MSIE acheived market share over Netscape by bundling MSIE with new copies of MS-Windows.
Quattro, Lotus 1-2-3 and other spread sheets were faster and more mature. It wasn't until MS-Excel v4 when Microsoft's alternativs started to come up to near the same grade as competitors.
Likewise with small desktop databases. Foxpro, dBase, FileMaker, Reflex, and others were still a length ahead of MS-Access. After all Microsoft is still playing catchup, though they did manage to buy out Foxpro. Oracle9i and IBM's DB2 by far offer the best performance and functionality for high end SQL servers. Postgresql and MySQL have the mid-range covered and would be what Microsoft's SQL server is trying hardest to compete with. The Microsoft SQL server is not up to snuff nor is it secure.
But almost-as-good won't displaced established tools. That's where leveraging and sales pitches comes in.
Early versions MS-Word were a unique exception among Microsoft's products in that they were actually competitive with contemporary products. However, whether MS-Word variants were actually better than WordPerfect, AMI and others is probably more an issue of taste than something objective. It and MS-Windows were used to shoehorn MS-Excel into sites.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
It should make quite a display as the enormous financial interests of Microsoft and RIAA tangle. I'll buy golden retirements for a lot of lawyers, feed our legislators with all sorts of lobbyist lunches, and give the Recording Industry a lot more to think about than giving DVD Jon a hard time or nipping a kid downloading a song.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
it should be Microso-sosoft.
For quite some time I've had Digital Impact's domains locally blacklisted on all the mail servers I administer, anyway. Those would be:
digitalimpact.net
digitalimpact.com
m0.net
But even if I hadn't: the "From:" fields in Microsoft's spam still say "microsoft.com" in them. And I have all of Microsoft's domains blacklisted as well. Those would be:
microsoft.com
bcentral.com
corbis.com
encarta.com
expedia.com
hmdelivery.com
hotmail.com
linkexchange.com
listbuilder.com
msn.com
msnbc.com
msnglobal.net
passport.com
wehavethewayout.com
windowsupdate.com
wheredoyouwanttogotoday.com
I'm not sure where I got hmdelivery.com from. Doesn't appear, at first blush, to be associated with M$. Maybe another "contractor" or whatever that once spammed for the Evil Empire? Dunno.
Microsoft, apparently, == Washington spam laws?
Will it "exempt" ISPs from the laws, or will it "overturn" the laws?
Muddled.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
And all this time I thought spam was some sort of meat.
If were above the LAW, then let's go get Iraq!!!
Because it's time to eat dinner. Hell, I'm starved, aren't you??
or Slash-doo-doo-dot?
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
If you've seen the microsoft commercial "we'll find the list of people who bought the record and send them e-mail" you know Microsoft is selling easier methods to spam.
actually, when the telco's or cableco's pull monopolistic kinda crap slasdotters claim on them too! or haven't you been following the DSL stuff lately?
is this related to the increase in spam I noticed this morning?
I got lots of suggestions for you:
Get your LEC to set up ANI on your dialups.... ANI can not be blocked. It is like callerID on steriods.
If you can't get ANI, require all new signups to dial into an 800 number for their first logon to activate their account. You get ANI with the callers phone number when they call an 800 number and they can't block it.
Require a voice contact number for new signups, and require a photocopy of the phone bill showing service address and account name for that number.
Or even simpler - require them to "activate" their account by calling IVR 800 number from their home phone, just like the credit cards do. You get ANI with full phone number and subscriber name, and you can block calls from payphones or from out of the local area.
When you catch a repeat offender, let him dial up and then immediately drop.... do this until he calls for tech support. Rope him in, and then offer to send a tech to his house with a free new modem in order to troubleshoot it. Get him to tell you how long he has been at that address and had that number.... tell him it may be an inside wiring problem (water in the jacket of the phone cable, corrosion, ground fault... make something believable up).
Once he admits that he has had that number and that address for the time period when the previous spam was sent from there, launch tactical strike of your choice.
Imagine what people would do in retaliation if they gave a valid e-mail address. That guy not too long ago who's info got out was signed up for every spam mailing people could think of.
They'd also be reported to their ISP/mail host and shut down since I don't imagine there are too many ISP's that don't have anti-spam rules in their TOS.
Not that any of it matters. Tracking them down or blocking them isn't impossible. It just takes more time than hitting the "delete" button. If I cared enough I have direct access to the logs when mail comes in to my server. I could easily use a quick whois and start reporting whatever IP made the connection to my server and let it get through.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Until Avon sues 'em out of existence for trademark dilution... hey! That's not such a bad idea! :)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Getting rid of Microsoft spam is easy. Since I have no friends or associates there I just set up a filter to take any messages with "Microsoft" in the sender address and route them directly to the trash bin.
The problem is to get rid of the *other* spammers.
Thankfully I live in Seattle so maybe I can collect an easy $500 before Microsoft guts the current law.
But think of all the free penis enlargers you'll be missing out on!
Digital Impact DIGTIMPAC-209-11-164 (NET-209-11-164-0-1) 209.11.164.0 - 209.11.167.255
Digital Impact DIGTIMPAC-209-11-136 (NET-209-11-136-0-1) 209.11.136.0 - 209.11.136.255
Digital Impact IP006821-209-10-47 (NET-209-10-47-64-1) 209.10.47.64 - 209.10.47.95
Digital Impact IP008425-209-10-200 (NET-209-10-200-64-1) 209.10.200.64 - 209.10.200.79
Digital Impact IP008619-209-10-46 (NET-209-10-46-152-1) 209.10.46.152 - 209.10.46.159
Digital Impact IP008618-209-10-39 (NET-209-10-39-176-1) 209.10.39.176 - 209.10.39.183
Digital Impact IP004540-209-11-137 (NET-209-11-137-0-1) 209.11.137.0 - 209.11.137.255
Digital Impact IP004541-209-11-138 (NET-209-11-138-0-1) 209.11.138.0 - 209.11.138.255
Digital Impact IP008620-209-11-133 (NET-209-11-133-128-1) 209.11.133.128 - 209.11.133.191
Digital Impact IP008621-209-11-141 (NET-209-11-141-16-1) 209.11.141.16 - 209.11.141.23
Digital Impact IP004542-209-11-139 (NET-209-11-139-0-1) 209.11.139.0 - 209.11.139.255
Digital Impact IP008622-209-11-141 (NET-209-11-141-24-1) 209.11.141.24 - 209.11.141.31
Digital Impact IP008617-209-11-133 (NET-209-11-133-248-1) 209.11.133.248 - 209.11.133.255
This, and then the very next day, I get SPAM from Microsoft!
http://oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/2895
Not long ago, /.ers were talking about how a new system at microsoft research will help stop spam and microsoft is doing something good. Anyone suggesting that the system was really a way to spam more was promptly flamed for dissing microsoft when microsoft is doing something good. It seemed pretty clear that penny black was about spamming, but /.ers supported it. How many of those /.ers are the same ones complaining today about microsoft spam.
You know that you can make money reading E-Mail for companies, don't you?
http://www.get-paid-2-read-emails.com/
According to my WA state senator's legislative aid:
I believe monty python coined the "I drink therefore I am" quote... give credit where it's due? Though i could be wrong.