Slashdot Mirror


Disgruntled Fan Arrested, Indicted For Spam Attacks

An anonymous reader submits: "A *very* interesting precedent here might get set here. A California man has been arrested by the FBI for sending spam spoofing the From: email address of several Philadelphia-area newspaper editors and writers. The charges relate to the damage caused by having the bounces sent back to the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News, with a total of more than 160,000 bounced emails. Maximum penalties: 471 years in federal prison, $117 million in fines." And not just arrested, either -- Reader red_dragon points to the indictment (PDF linked from this U.S. Attorney's Office release).

11 of 363 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Punishment fitting the crime? by theglassishalf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thus the old maxim:

    Never tick off people who buy paper by the roll and ink by the barral.

    -Daniel

  2. Re:Punishment fitting the crime? by captainclever · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is crazy - bounced emails don't cause $117 million damage.

    The guy could have raped, pillaged and murdered and still do less jail time / fines.

    --
    Last.fm - join the social music revolution
  3. Gov't wants us to rage with assault and bettery by elwinc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Given the disparity of penalties between, say, a mugging and this spam attack, it's clear that the government would prefer that we express our rage with assault and battery. Most murderers get off with less than 471 years. Lemme know your favorite assault weapon so I can start settling my scores the gov't approved way. note to humor impaired: that's sarcasm there. I agree with General Clark: if you want assault weapons, join the Army -- they've got lot's of 'em.

    --
    --- Often in error; never in doubt!
  4. Kill a person, get 20 to life by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Carlson faces a maximum sentence of 471 years imprisonment and $117,250,000 in fines."

    Well damn, I'm heading out to the gun store, gonna rob me some banks, shoot me up some people up and still get out of prison faster than this guy.

    Is it just me or has the US Guhvumment been totally hijacked by corporate interests to the point where the US Constitution is just a minor inconvenience?

    What happened to no cruel nor unusual punishment, the punishment fitting the crime, our inaliable rights?

    The only time I have heard of such a possible maximum has been in the case of multiple-murder and serial child molestation. And even if they give him say... 5 years, he will be financially ruined forever at even a fraction of the proposed monetary damages. So his life might as well be over.. quite lliterally made a slave to the corporations he will have to pay this "restitution" to...
    And wasn't slavery constitutionally abolished over 100 years ago? Well as long as he isn't black I guess it's all ok.

  5. Journalism 101 by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why did the article authors mention the guy being a possible white supremacist? They say that in the first paragraph, as if it were something important, and then don't bother going on to connect that to the events described in the article.

    I mean, generally speaking, most people agree that any form of racist supremacy is bad, but if it doesn't have anything to do with the charges against him, then mentioning it just incites the audience unfairly. If his political views do have something to do with his actions, then they should have let us know instead of leaving us hanging.

  6. Re:A very (ludicrous, retarded, draconian) precede by abb3w · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Prison is for people dangerous to society. Murderers, rapists, other assorted thugs. Society isn't helped because a spammer is in jail.

    Well, it's not helped by leaving them out of jail. They are a public nuisance to millions of people. And in this case, cost someone money. Now, having them taken out and shot, or having their kneecaps broken, would probably be better way to deal with spammers than throwing them in jail, but we have this "cruel and unusual" clause here in the US, so jail it is.
    And yes, the Media has some protected status here in the US; pragmatically, because the government desires to keep anything powerful from getting too pissed at it, but also on the principle that people interfering with First-Amendment protected organizations are Bad.

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  7. Re:Justice? by Ixitar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are forgetting the fact that the 471 years are multiple sentences running consecutively.

    Now, lets take a look at your examples again.

    Disfiguring with acid

    10 victims = 20 - 40 years
    100 victims = 200 - 400 years

    cutting someone up with a knife

    10 victims = 20 - 40 years
    100 victims = 200 - 400 years

    Gunning down people with a machine gun

    10 victims = 40 - 120 years
    100 victims = 400 - 1200 years

    He has 79 counts of computer-hacking related offenses and also with identity theft. Over 160,000 forged e-mails. Lets try using two years for each computer-hacking offense

    79 * 2 = 158 years

    That leaves 313 years for the forged e-mails.

    When prosecuting someone, it is a good idea to charge the perpetrator with as many offenses as possible. I think that the cracking offenses alone are sufficient, but a little overkill definitely sends a message.

    Mr. Carlson's alleged activities were definitely overkill.

  8. Re:Justice? by Cato+the+Elder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "471 years for spoofing a From: email header"

    Not at all. He is facing 79 criminal counts, He would only get 471 years if he were sentenced to the maximum for every count AND served them consecutively.

    It's the consecutively part that makes the 471 number meaningless. This is clearly a case where sentences should run concurrently.

  9. IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHO YOU HURT!!! by fmaxwell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Maximum penalties: 471 years in federal prison, $117 million in fines."

    That's the fine and penalties when your spam hurts some high-profile, moneyed public figure. If the guy had forged the e-mail address of some average Joe, we wouldn't be reading about it here. If he had caused you or I to get 160,000 bounces and numerous angry e-mails, we would have been lucky to get his ISP to issue a warning -- much less get the FBI investigating and prosecuting.

    I'll be impressed when the same level of interest is shown when some poor sap at home is the victim. But I'm not holding my breath.

  10. What the fuck is wrong with you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you really think that rape is an apropriate punishment for any crime, if so why not make it at public spectacle. Then I'm sure it will really scare all the criminals into law abiding citicens.
    It is sickening the way people on slashdot seem to find the barbaric conditions of the american prison system one big joke. Do you really think that you are immune to the justice system, and that you never ever could end up in prison yourself - The same way every heroin addict never believed that he could be addicted, when he tried that first fix.
    Rape is not a joke, no matter what the sex of the victim!

  11. bullshit by eternlvoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it is exactly that kind of thinking that leads to subjective sentencing and state extortion. If you've been following Ashcroft, you know that they're trying to force the courts to follow the law when sentencing and mandating minimum sentences.

    If it is ridiculous to be sentenced to 471 years in jail for whatever number of disgruntled emails sent, then it should NOT BE IN THE LAW. It is the same with contracts and leases, etc, when there are wholly one-sided clauses that are just their for one party's 'protection', 'the lawyers make us put that there' -- It is the people's fault for not complaining when things get added or signed into law in the first place.

    The point is, for a system of law to be effective and respected, it has to be consistent and fair. If the sentencing is the judge's discretion, then you deal with issues of race and sexuality & politics, etc. But if they are included into the law in the first place, and everyone agrees, then everyone can agree later to accept the punishments or work to change them again. If you want room for extenuating circumstances, think of what they could be, and add them into the law. It may make for a wordy penal code, but the clarity will help prevent discrimination and promote a sense of equality in the people.

    It is ridiculously simple to influence the politicians, as you saw with the Do-not-call registry. All you have to do is contact them. They even make it easy for you, they give you their phone number, address, and email address. If a large enough amount of people want something, they do it, because above-all, they don't want to lose their seat.