Massachusetts Atty. General Forces Spammer to Pay

Cildar writes "The Attorney General of Massachusetts has forced a Florida spammer to pay a $25,000 fine and enter into a cease and desist order. The original suit contained both state consumer protection theories as well as allegations of CAN-SPAM violations. Here is the Attorney General's press release.

Comments

Cost of doing business

[erick99]

I don't think these court "settlements" slow this guy down at all. He was also successfully sued and ordered to pay $104,104 this past April. You can read about that case here. I am wondering if it is the case that he makes so much money sending spam that these fines and settlements are no more than the cost of doing business.

Re:Cost of doing business

[TykeClone]

As well he should - it is a legitimate business expense.

Whether or not it's a legitimate business is another story, though.

Re:Cost of doing business

[TykeClone]

They are in Canada http://www.grantthornton.ca/taxtips/taxtips_templa te.asp?TipID=48

Looks like they're not (anymore) in the United States - at least on the Federal level:http://grassley.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAct ion=PressReleases.View&PressRelease_id=59

Re:Lex Talionis is a morally bankrupt code

[Fnkmaster]

You are clearly trolling since nobody said anything about the spammer getting spammed or lex talionis.

I don't know why I'm bothering to respond to your out of context post, but the reason that we consider raping the rapist to be morally bankrupt is that rape is an awful violation of somebody's human rights, even if that person has themselves committed that crime. Spam, while an annoyance and a pain in the ass, is not a violation of human rights, just a negative externality (and one I certainly despise). So the point is that when a thief gets something stolen from him or a spammer gets spammed, it's not comparable to a rapist being raped. As to the effectiveness as a means of prophylaxis or rehabilitation, I'm not sure that ANY means of punishment have been shown to be effective in those ways.

A bit more looking

[TykeClone]

Penalties and fines paid to the IRS and any other governmental agencies are never tax-deductible, because this is deemed to be against public policy. Sorry, this includes parking tickets, too http://www.nolo.com/lawstore/products/product.cfm/ ObjectID/8B17922C-836F-4F71-A67225892035843E/sampl eChapter/6

That does look pretty cut and dried that they are not deductible.

Re:Reilly rocks.

[MBCook]

"Pretty sad when you loose an election to a dead person and get slotted right into a high ranking, federal executive position you're not even remotely qualified for."

I've seen this many times before, here on /. too, and it makes me sick. It's not like he was an incumbent that was so bad he lost to a dead guy (which would be one thing). He was the challenger. He lost to a very popular man who died VERY shortly before the election. They couldn't change the ballot. Some (many?) people saw voting for him as a way to honor his memory.

Now I'm not going to pretend to know whether Mel Carnahand, a.k.a. "the dead guy", was good or not. I won't pretend to know whether his wife (who got the seat he won) is any good. I don't live in Missouri so it doesn't effect me personally. But if you are going to pick on someone you don't like for political reasons... GROW UP and do it in a more mature way (like with real, relevant facts). "He must be dum and abizmul at his job 'cause he lost to a dead guy! Ha ha ha". Grow up. Have a little respect.

And it wouldn't matter if Ashcroft was a good AG (I'm not saying he is or isn't). Chances are he would be replaced with the change of administration anyway.

Re:I'd Prefer Stoning

[Anonymous Coward]

What's your excuse for getting spam?

Some people use the internet for more than just playtime, Threehead. Some of us have to maintain legitimate whois contact info for all the domains we're responsible for, and can't just go changing our email addresses every time another fuckload of spam rolls in.