Slashdot Mirror
Virginia Arrests Man For Spamming
volpe writes "According to this Yahoo news story, Virginia arrested a North Carolina man for spamming in violation of a new state law. He was arrested Thursday afternoon in Raleigh, NC. The story is pretty fresh, so the news details are still pretty thin."
I think it's great that something is being done about spamming, though I don't think it's a criminal but a civil offense.
Although based in North Carolina, Virginia is asserting jurisdiction over Jaynes because he sent messages through computers located in the state.
So does this mean that any spam passing through any of VA's pipe or VA is liable to be punished?
Or did he send spam to someone at VA? The article is not very clear on that, but it seems likely.
But if its merely because it passed through VA, then whoa! Infinite coolness.
From the article:
"Although based in North Carolina, Virginia is asserting jurisdiction over Jaynes because he sent messages through computers located in the state.
Roughly 50 percent of the world's Internet traffic passes through Virginia, home to big Internet companies like Time Warner Inc.'s (NYSE:TWX - news) American Online unit and MCI (Other OTC:WCOEQ - news)."
So that means he can be charged in federal court, too, since his crime involves multiple states, doesn't it? Or does it have to be shown that his email crossed into multiple states in order to take it to federal court? I would like to see more spammers be tried in federal court because the financial penalties are more significant and injurous than in many states. I would think a case could be made for the intent to damage people in multiple states just by accessing Virginia given its backbone status.
Of course, having a spammer charged in multiple states would be fine, too, just as long as it sticks and he pays for his crime in a way that deters him and others like him (I know, small chance of that).
- tokengeekgrrl
What am I doing, I work at CMU, and I have one address I never gave to any one, here (my andrew account) and I get 30 spams a day, and I never told any one about this address ( it is to the point I don't check it)
What happend is it got listed on CMU's directory, and that what happend. My main work email ( @cs.cmu.edu ) is also listed is a directory too.
I'm just waiting for the follow up story on how it was a worm on his computer sending out the spam and he had no idea.
I'd be pissed if my mom got arrested under this law because she didn't have her computer patched and got some spam-worm.
-Steve
$7.95/mo, 200 GB disk, 2TBxfer, MySQL, PHP, RoR.
Our Jail Systems are definately overcrowded, and to alleviate the problem some violent criminals are getting released early, too early.
This law will just compound the problem. Does sending spam justify PRISON TIME, i don't think so. They should just put them under house arrest or major community services AND revoke all internet access.
Let the punishment fit the crime.
I thought that interstate commerce could not be interfered with by states...that only the Feds could do this. The line in the article saying so much traffic goes through Virginia....Well, if this guy was sending email trying to sell a product....wouldn't this Virginia law violate the 'freedom' of interstate commerce?
I like to see spam killed, but, wondering if this is a loophole until closed by Fed. law in the US?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
They have about 200 other persons/companies listed there. I would think it's easier to track and shut down the companies listed there, as they would have a larger paper trail than individual spammers.
On a side note, I have *never* been bothered by spam on the 2 main accounts I use (except an occasional mail or two). And it's not like my former school/current workplace use any significant anti-spam tools. I guess it's just a matter of giving out your email addresses wisely, and using a couple of honeypot addresses for less important work.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
that the virginia state gov't can put this guy away for twenty years for this. twenty years! isn't this a bit drastic? hell, draconian?
sure, we all hate spam but, really, it's just a minor annoyance (and don't give me this bandwidth-usage argument... all the spam you receive in a year doesn't equal the divx of return of the king your boosting of kazaa right now) and 20 years is a bit of an over reaction.
2 1337 4 u!
You're like the ACLU guys who defend NAMBLA. They whine that "these guys should be allowed to have their website which specifically states ways to lure young boys to you and has detailed tips on sex acts with them." Now, I'm ok with Nazis marching with their hate speech as long as it's not actively threatening (note: I'm Jewish), but when someone like these NAMBLA guys are actively promoting harm to people, and these spammers who are also causing finite damage (albeit at a much different level - I'm not saying Mortgage spam is just as bad as rape-tips), then they don't deserve these freedoms.
It appears, based on the article, that this was the product of work by Republican Attorney General Jerry Kilgore. I'm pleased that he's enforcing the law, but by way of background, I should point out why he's choosing to enforce this particular law at this particular time.
Our governor, Mark Warner, is a millionaire hundreds of times over, having made his fortune in tech in Northern Virginia. He got elected on the strength of his business and tech expertise. His term is up in two years, and, under Virginia law, he can't run for reelection. So the race is on between Lieutenant Governor Tim Kaine and Attorney General Jerry Kilgore, the presumed Democratic and Republican nominees.
As is often the case with vice-anythings, Kaine is forced to live under the shadow of Gov. Warner for the time being, while Kilgore is under the shadow of nobody. Kilgore tends to spend most of his time ensuring that people aren't having sex (he's working to keep Virginia's ridiculous bedroom laws on the books; sex outside of marriage is illegal, oral sex is illegal, homosexuality is illegal, etc.) and attempting to keep from getting indicted for his role in the recent Republican wiretapping scandal, something that has just been revealed in the past week.
So, Kilgore gets a twofer with this prosecution. Not only is this yet another thing that he can tout on the campaign trail ("Kaine? Tech? Hell, I brought two spammers back from Carolina, hog-tied and all!"), but he's no doubt hoping that this will overshadow, at least for a few precious days, some of the accusations against him for wiretapping charges.
Again, I'm glad to see this law enforced. Virginia's law is badly-written, in the sense that it must be enforced by Commonwealth's Attorneys, and few of them have the slightest concept of how to or desire to do so. It's good that our Attorney General is willing to take the lead in cracking down.
-Waldo Jaquith
I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion with many people but, whether you like it or not, it's the sane opinion.
I hate spam as much as the next guy. Spam is like being harassed by a horsefly when you just want to sit in the boat and go fishing. Spam is a terrible nuisance. That said I don't want to see this guy go to prison unless he was spamming for unsavory things like ridiculously immoral pr0n or predatory pyramid schemes. I just want him, and other people like him, to STOP SENDING SPAM.
At the same time I realize that while it would be nice to let the punishment fit the crime that's not the way our judicial system works. There are no alternative punishments like ensuring that this guy can't own a computer or be associated with marketing organizations. It would be impossible to prevent him from somehow getting back into the same business of spamming people to make money. Our judicial system provides for parole but, unless someone's watching this guy 24-7-365, he'll always be able to get back into the spam market. Aside from a horribly expensive parole system the only thing that we can do with spammers is put them in prison and hope that they don't start running spam rings from the inside (movie: Blood in Blood out).
I just don't know where it all goes anymore.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
Like these guy's suing Pfizer the maker of Viagra.
Help fight continental drift.
I'm happy to live in the city that snatched this asshole. Unfortunately, the federal Can Spam act is going to make many individual spam laws null and void, and replace it with a bad and worthless federal law. If tech people thought congress was capable of making a problem worse, they will certainly see it with spam. When the Can Spam law goes into effect, the spam problem will probably get much worse, unfortunately.
take all there assets, and give them to the local school.
Then make the guy spend weekend cleaning up parks for a year.
Much more resonable for the crime, and it costs the tax payers lee money.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
I know we all hate spam, and we hate spammers more. BUT. A possible 20 years in prison? That doesn't seem right to me. Especially for first (punishable?) offense. I imagine he'll get off with a fine and some community service (I hope). And the threat of jail time if he continues to run a business of sending spam.
...whatever, and he should do some community service hours...
Prison/Jail should be reserved for people who are unable to function in society and/or present a significant danger to others. All other crimes should be punishable through community service of some sort...
I don't believe this guy poses a serious threat to those around him, or society, so there is no reason to separate him from those groups. I'm all for making spam 'illegal' but I don't believe it should carry a jail sentence unless the person is spamming us with illegal material like kiddy porn, or unless they repeatedly give the court the finger and continue their operations.
The court should order him to stop sending spam email, and to close his business down within a certain period of time (hey, this guy has built a business on top of something that was legal until very recently (apparently). Although you may not like his business, let's be the bigger person and show the guy some compassion, give 'em a buffer zone to find a new business or legit job...?) He should also be given a fine possibly? Money from the fine should go to education in the county or state
If that's not an interference with interstate commerce, I don't know what is.
2. Mens rea - Knowledge/intent of the crime. Most crimes (other than traffic violations) require at least that the accused knew he was doing the facts that make up the crime (not that it IS a crime, only the underlying facts). Here, the crime requires that the email pass through Virginia. How is he supposed to know whether a particular email he sends is passing through Virginia? Even if he is sending it to AOL, he doesn't necessarily know that AOL is in Virginia.
Yet another conflict between fighting spam and preserving our rights.
Wrong. Whether it is opt-in or not depends on which state's law you apply.
How could you not know what state the person you are sending email to is in?
According to the article, the Virginia statute does not require that you send email to someone in Virginia. It only requires that the email "pass through" a server located in Virginia.
This is something that is completely unpredictable. If this is constitutional, it would give the state power to regulate your communications with someone not in that state, simply because the communication "passes through" that state.
Are you going to do a traceroute each time you send someone an email? Even that wouldn't work, because it is your ISP's server sending the email, not you. So you would have to make sure that your communication follows the laws of all 50 states.
Allowing this would give any state the power to regulate not just your email, but your web-browsing, your ftping, your bittorrenting, your usenet posts... everything, spam or otherwise.
There is no reasonable way for a person to follow the laws of 50 different governments for every single communication they make on the internet. Nevermind the time and effort in researching that law... what if those laws conflict? You then have to do the internet equivalent of changing your mudflaps for every single packet, every time that packet crosses state lines.
This would require a complete change of the structure of the internet so that it could recognize state boundaries.
That kind of inconvenience is the essence of what the dormant commerce clause forbids, unreasonable limitations on interstate commerce.
So, forget for a moment that this particular law will be superseded by Federal law soon... think about the difficulty of complying with the laws of 50 different states every time you click on a URL.
How about if Virginia got all worked up about the dangers of Freenet. Tomorrow they outlaw Freenet and prosecute criminally anyone who sends Freenet packets through a Virginia server. If you used Freenet, how would you handle that?