Slashdot Mirror
Spamford Wallace Draws A Restraining Order
Steve Rock writes "According to an article in the Associated Press, a temporary restraining order has been issued by a judge against Stanford Wallace and his companies. The case marks the first anti-spyware action taken by the Federal Trade Commission, and while there is some argument about permitting unsolicited commercial e-mail because of free speech it appears a tougher approach will be taken with alleged spyware distribution."
"Free speech" only applies to the extent that you have the right to speak freely, it does not extend to the point that you have a right to be heard, as you dont.. Nor does it allow that I have to pay to hear your "free speech".
Same reasons fax-Spam is illegal. It costs the recipient.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
"...while there is some argument about permitting unsolicited commercial e-mail because of free speech..."
Now that's a new one...
What if somebody argued that graffiti was free speech?
My point here is that nobody should legally be able to flood your email account with messages you don't want. It wastes the resources both of the systems across which the messages travel and of the people who have to go through them. In addition, it has been repeatedly shown in studies that unsolicited email is not an effective advertising strategy.
In summary, free speech is the right to express your views, not to shove them in someone's face without their permission.
Really? Well, me personally, I'm not so sure what the problem with spyware. It's just another legitimate way of doing business. They did agree to the EULA allowing it after all, didn't they?
Take me for example. I sell preassembled computer systems. As part of the package I include a short, 83-page EULA that fires up when they first boot the system. After accepting the EULA (which they don't see until after I've cashed their cheque btw) I drop around to the customers house and install a series of automatic pop-up rock flingers in their front garden. At 3am the rock flingers pelt their bedroom windows with small rocks... generally not enough to break the glass, but I'm working on it. When they come out to see what the problem is, a hidden speaker blares out "Buy computer hardware from OverflowingBitBucket Inc!".
Thankfully the supplied EULA allows me to do this, so it's all legal. In fact, I'm anticipating an increase in business, as several customers have called me _personally_ and said they'll be dropping around to see me real soon now.
Nobody believes they are the bad-guy.
Even the most heinous criminal has a way of justifying their actions to themselves.
They don't understand the bit where it says "Congress shall make no law restraining the freedom of speech".
Okay, that's a bit disingenious - they do understand it, they just hope you don't. It's why they try to make it sound as if Congress passing laws dealing with a specific mode of theft of services (spam, spyware, trackerware, thiefware and other commercial malware that does not also violate other laws such as phishing and ID theft) is somehow "Restricting commercial free speech".
No such goddamned thing - it's congress putting the assholes on notice that "You! Yes, you. The laws of theft of service applies to you too."
However, spyware/thiefware (Gator/Claria, WhenU, and Spamford in this instance) is even worse - they specifically set out to steal the revenue from other affiliate/content providers/merchants and they also steal the computing resources neccesary to do this from you.
Bayesian filtering and such can to some extent stop spammers. Ad-aware and Spybot can to some extent deal with hijackers. But neither is a solution to corporate interests legally stealing resources from others, is it?
The next spam mail you get in your email, you can send a "Fuck you very much" to the Direct Marketers Association in the USA who spent more money lobbying for an opt-out regime than the rest of us will see in a lifetime.
Their Canadian counterparts in the Canadian Direct Marketer's Association on the other hand has adopted a strong support for opt-in and preferably verifiable/double opt-in as the industry Recommended Best Pratice.
The CDMA understood something the DMA failed to get: in the long run, it's Bad For Business to piss off your potential customers.
I hesitate to post with my name on this, but here's some insight. I hate these people just as much as you do.
:)
:) One time I configured a DNSBL for a spammer. Hope he doesn't plan to get mail from those hosts. :)
... oh, 6 or 7 months.
:)
I'm not working for a corp anymore, trying to get a contracting business going, because you get screwed or outsourced working for anyone who gets investors via stock. The faceless nature of a corporation does not care who you are, your aspirations unrelated to the workplace and your current situation. They merely want your skills and labor. This is a concept that trickles down the management chain, unfortunately less by force but by those who want to "succeed". Personally, I'll take a heaping helping of poverty over that kind of success. I left when the disgust was far beyond what I could stand. Let's just say I'm not persuing the traditional avenues for work anymore. I would like to think I have an impressive skill set and resume, and I think a good portion of hiring companies would agree. So my talent is not really in question here.
Anyways, to augment my stifled income I turned to various online freelance places. The pay isn't great but it's a buck to be made which equates to food being placed in my fridge, a roof over my head and some modern amenities such as electricity, plumbing, and internet access, 2 of which I require to make money at my trade. (No, I am not a plumber
First off, you're bidding against guys in India and parts of Eastern Europe where $200 is a month's rent. The buyers are well aware of this and drive the price down to far beyond minimum wage. I've done a couple projects which equate to cents on the hour, but again, food on the table.
Second, because you are not put in the position where one job will pay the rent, you are put in a position where you bid on tons of jobs at a time - my average "bid day" is about 100 bids. These are all communicated and fullfilled. A good "bid day" will equate to around 20-30 projects varying in price from $50-$300. Only the cabals of 20 programmers get the big projects, and this isn't exactly something I want to make a sustainable income on. I average one bid day a month, $300 is a very well-paying project.
Anyways, with the combination of these two, you can see where I'm going here. They give me a project, I don't ask what they're doing and I really don't care. Food on the table. I could care less if you get a silly piece of email that sells you viagra, I've got bigger things to worry about. Thankfully, my "real" contracting is starting to take off so I've stopped bidding until I have to worry about it again.
I have gotten my "revenge" through a couple of well-placed timebombs in my scripts, and occasionally I'll create new accounts to bid and accept projects that are extremely vile (yes, there are lines) just to let them fall by the wayside.
If you want to blame me, fine. Sadly, I have bigger concerns than the morality of unsolicited email, giving someone a tool to spider popular websites and search engines (complete with auto-correcting open proxy support), amongst other things. As stated before it's not something I like at all, but it is, unfortunately, somewhat of a necessary evil. If you're about to say, "get a job at a gas station" or something sillier, I have a job coming up that requires 100% of my time at a pay which is 4 times what I was making at my corp job. The pay from that alone can keep me off those bids for
Anyways, I'm done justifying myself. Consider this informative of the landscape that you are encountering. The "evil" people aren't writing these applications, the hungry are.
Crime always comes to those who are lazy and want a good paycheck for being lazy. OTOH, I worked 80 hours last week for $40. If you want to call me a slimeball, think about the guy I used to work for who told me one thing about a raise I needed to get my head above water