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).
Sending spam is bad.
That being said, does it seem a little unfair that the indictment charges him with "hacking", when in fact he just spoofed his email address?
"Oh, beautiful for spacious skies...."
gah.
have you been seen on slash?
A *very* interesting precendent here might get set here.
This might *not* have been read by a slashdot editor might *not* have read this.
Thus the old maxim:
Never tick off people who buy paper by the roll and ink by the barral.
-Daniel
Ownyourphone.com. Custom ringtones, cheap and easy
For forged bounced emails, the fine is 1 day in prison and/or $734. Per email.
:)
I got 500 bounced emails from a university in Canada once, should I sue them using this as a precedent?
I could *really* use $365,000. I'd even accept it in Canadian dollars (in fact, that would be easier, given that I am Canadian).
$117mil/160k mails = $731.25 per email.
Now, I've had spammers use my address as a from: address a couple of times, resulting in a couple of thousand bounces in my inbox.
When should I expect my check for $1,462,500 to arrive?
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
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!
"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.
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.
I could have expected this from a Flyers fan, but a Phillies fan?
What's this world coming to?
Someone you trust is one of us.
Let's look at California penal code.
How about throwing acid in someone's face?
OK, let's see, what if I attack someone with a knife?
Hell, given that Arnie is now governator of California what happens if I start spraying machinegun fire around?
So, four years in jail for permanently disfiguring someone, four years for cutting somebody up with a knife, twelve for machinegunning people and... 471 years for spoofing a From: email header.
Ah, yes, justice...
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
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.
Prison is for people dangerous to society. Murderers, rapists, other assorted thugs. Society isn't helped because a spammer is in jail
Research shows that many inmates tend to become even more hardened criminals once they are sent to prison.
When he gets out in 2471, society better watch out.
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
How nice of the US Attorney's Office to publish the defendant's FULL NAME, CURRENT ADDRESS and DATE OF BIRTH prominently on the web, for all to see.(See linked PDF in topic) Even better, this guy is going to be out of the house for a while, so it should be no problem to pick up his mail.
I swear, the only thing protecting this guy's ID now is his new-found criminal record.
News Flash: China, in a desperate attempt to keep up with the United States has introduced a wave of new registration including the death penalty for spamming. A seperate bill, also introduced, proposes 30 years hard labor for trolling Slashdot.
Spammers and other net vermin (cowards all) cause a small to moderate amount of harm to millions of people. They are getting away with it because they are not held accountable.
If the harm product of Spammers and other shitheads (defined as harm * number of victims) were held constant, and the number of victims reduced, to say 10 thousand people, then spammers would be hanging from electric poles in every neighborhood.
If a person hurts one other person, then they deserve punishment. When spammers and joe jobbers hurt millions of people, that punishment should be multiplied..
I personally favor eating spammers brains while they are still alive ( a lot like raw oysters, actually, with a wedge of lemon or a splash of tabasco) but then again I am a moderate softie, and my friends and coworkers make fun of me for being such a wuss.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
"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.
General clark is paraphrasing Himmler (along with other NAZI sources).
(Clark had to join the Democrats once he uttered his version. There's no longer a chance he could collect enough Republican primary votes to secure a presidential nomination.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Give him some webmail account that he can access over dialup from prison. Publish that email far and
wide so it'll end up on every spam list in the world.
Then, tell him that once a year he'll get an email with a password that if he gives the prison guard, he can leave at any time.
This email can come in any form, with any subject heading, very likely disguised as spam. His webmail account will also have a 5Mb limit, and if the email bounces because it just happens to come when the mailbox is full, he'll have to wait for the next year.
Looking for a computer support specialist for your small business? Check out
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!
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.
Don't forget that's the MAXIMUM penalty. For every bounced e-mail there is a certain penalty, they add up and form a maximum penalty. A judge will set a MUCH MUCH lower penalty based on the crime and the damage done. The only reason the penalty was so high is because everything is automated, it's a lot easier for a computer to commit a crime 160,000 times.
If you made a script that raped or murdered 160,000 people your maximum penalty would be quite high too. I think it's about 4 million years in prison for 160,000 second degree murder charges. And I think the minimum sentence for 160,000 rape charges would be a bit under 3 million years. It wasn't that the penalty for this persons crimes should be over 400 years in prison, it's just that the maximum penalties add up to that and the fines also just happen to add up to over 100 million.