UK Makes Spamming a Fineable Offense

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Makes Spamming a Fineable Offense

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thursday September 18, 2003 @07:08AM from the get-your-punish-on dept.

woodhouse writes "The BBC has an article about the new UK anti-spamming law which comes into force later this year. Under the new law, spammers can be fined up to 5000 pounds in a magistrates court, or an unlimited amount in the crown court. Sadly, prison terms won't be used to enforce of the new law."

10 of 310 comments (clear)

spamhaus rebutts this claim by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-18 07:09 · Score: 5, Informative

Why the law won't work
could be worse by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-18 07:10 · Score: 5, Funny

Better to be fined up to 5000 pounds in a magistrates court...
...than to be pounded by 5000 magistrates.
...or courted by a 5000 pound magistrate.
Oh no! by Prince_Ali · 2003-09-18 07:11 · Score: 5, Funny

Sadly, prison terms won't be used to enforce of the new law.
Oh no, we need to get these violent people off the streets before they e-mail again!

--
Slashdotter are stupid and biased.
Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-18 07:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

Sadly, prison terms won't be used to enforce of the new law.
Prison for sending email? Come on, let's stop with the juvenille, knee-jerk reactions.
1. Re:Huh? by spuke4000 · 2003-09-18 07:40 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  let's stop with the juvenille, knee-jerk reactions
  
  You must be new here.
  
  --
  This post cannot be rebroadcast without the express written constent of Major League Baseball.
Prison should be reserved for violent criminals... by ivan256 · 2003-09-18 07:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why should we waste money keeping these people in prison when they're not a physical threat to anybody, and when we can force them to become productive members of society? Don't spend my money throwing spammers in prison, use their ill-gotten gains to catch other spammers, and then force them to work at a job that helps the economy rather than forcing them to sit behind bars and have gay sex on the taxpayer tab.
Warped world view.. by molo · 2003-09-18 07:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

You must have a warped world view to advocate having people jailed for costing you time and money. Especially in a world where someone only gets 1 year for a hit-and-run that killed a little girl and maimed another.

-molo

--
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
Billy Tauzin's Opt-Out spam bill by bs_02_06_02 · 2003-09-18 07:15 · Score: 5, Funny

Billy Tauzin continues to promote Opt-out... which means anyone can spam you as much as possible until you complain. Then, they have someone else spam you, and then you complain, and then someone else spams you, and this continues until someone gets killed. Opt-out. What a terrible idea! But, no one in politics knows anything about technology. Most politicians are puppets. Democrats and Republicans both.

--
-- No sig for you!
Re:The folly of law by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-18 07:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

what about going after the sponsors of the spam?
Re:How about a restraining order by sakeneko · 2003-09-18 07:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

How about a restraining order on spammers where they are ordered not to ever touch a computer again. That's what they do to a lot of crackers.

Yeah, except that times have changed and it's increasingly necessary to touch a computer to perform basic tasks of living and working. I'm not talking about software engineering or other high-tech work; I'm talking about being a clerk at a convenience store.

Even the suspected author of one variant of the MS Blaster worm, Jeffrey Parson, was told by the judge that he could use the Internet to look for work. Judges are increasingly unwilling to place permanent draconian restrictions on computer criminals because that could leave them unemployable, and an unemployable person can be forced back into crime by that very fact.

I agree that aggressive, repeat spammers -- the sort that end up on the SpamHaus.org ROKSO (Register of Known Spam Operations) list -- deserve to be thrown permanently off the Internet. But maybe we should think of some more practical ways to deal with them?

--
Catherine