Microsoft Sues Spammers

mclearn writes "Microsoft has filed seven more lawsuits against spammers, this time targeting those who violate the 'brown-paper wrapper' provision of the CAN-SPAM law, which sets rules for sexually oriented e-mail solicitations. Apparently these are a small part of over 120 spam-related cases Microsoft is currently litigating. With Microsoft's deep pockets, can they effectively send a resounding message to spammers?"

Comments

The spammers will just move overseas

[DemonCat]

As we pass laws in the US against spam, and start enforcing them, all it will ultimately do is drive the spamming operations out of the country. There will always be some small poor nation willing to let these paracites stay as long as they generate some tax revenue and keep a few locals employed. Blocking international email traffic isn't a viable option, so there is little we will be able to do about it.

Given that, I have moral objections to spammers and am pleased each time I hear of one getting what he or she deserves.

Re:The spammers will just move overseas

[Frater 219]

Let them move. Let them live in paranoid armed compounds in "small poor nations" and fear that the locals will dig up their phone lines for the copper. Let them hide in places where the corrupt telecoms monopoly has run Internet access so badly that their IP addresses are already widely blocked for spam and abuse. Let them eventually get lined up by a tin-pot dictator and executed at dawn by firing squad, since they want to live beyond the rule of law. (After all, we can always block 'em -- I understand getting an email out of Nigeria is pretty tricky these days.)

Currently, the bulk of the big spammers live and operate within the United States. They may host their Web sites in China, buy lists of open proxies from Romania, and commission viruses from Russian Mafia programmers -- but they live in the "comfort" of the U.S. whose laws they flout.

They do not want to move overseas. They want the comforts of home -- to make millions without leaving the couch. They are small-minded, hurtful, nasty little people. They want the world delivered to their door, and are willing to steal and destroy to get it -- but only if they can do that stealing and destroying from behind a screen. They are not brave. When they are challenged, they retreat into paranoia and lash out with lawsuits based on conspiracy theories. Can't do that from East Bumfuckistan.

Re:Amazed!

[MP3Chuck]

Well of course ... they run one of the biggest email operations out there so it'd be in their best interest to eliminate spam, since it only hurts them. It's no surprise, really.

Well it won't be the deth bell or anything

[Sycraft-fu]

But it will help. All technology, lawsuits, and prosecution helps slow the increase (hopefully to the point of making it negative) of spam. Technology and lawsuits both make spam a less profitable proposition. The less spam that gets through, the less sales you make. The more spammers that get sued and lose their ass, the less likely the average spammer is to come out ahead. The more spammers get locked up, the more scary a proposition it is to new ones.

It's all about making it less attractive. It will always be attractive to some, even if thepbenalty is death by anal probe. However the numbers CAN be reduced by things like this.

Up till receantly, all it took to be a spammer was a total lack of ethics. There was basically no risk. You wouldn't get sued, and there was no law against it. Combine that with the returns, you had a lot of people lining up.

Well now there IS a risk. You can get your sued to the point of losing everything, and locked up in jail for a good long time. Also the returns will continue to get worse as more and more gets blocked.

We can never expcet to get rid of spam completely, but with effort we can curtail it. It's not like drugs where people demand it, actively seek it out, and will pay massive amount of money for it. Most people, even those that buy from it, don't want to get it. Thus all you really need to do is make it unattractive to people and most of it will die off.

Re:I don't know who to root for!

[general_re]

I don't want Microsoft to win money from spammers, but I want to spammers to burn and die (and go broke in the process). Who should I root for?

Microsoft has such an ungodly amount of money already that you might as well root for them, since nothing they win is likely to have much of a material impact on who they are or what they do. MS winning a million dollars in court is like you finding a $10 bill on the sidewalk - it might perk up your morning a bit, but it's not going to change your life. Spammers paying out millions, though - that'll wreck your whole day if you're in the spam business...

Everyone come down a little bit...

[apiccirilli]

For all the Microsoft naysayers out there, could we pause one little moment here? Before we trash everything Microsoft does as being downright evil with secret motives, it might be nice to consider that perhaps Microsoft IS doing something decent. After all, Bill Gates is undeniably a good guy when it comes to charity (I hope most people would be without that kind of money, but he does do a LOT of stuff with it). And he has been known to do a good amount of anti-spam work with Congress. Could it be possible that their 120 suits against spammers are actually at least slightly altruistic in purpose?

I'm not saying not to hold a little suspicion - they are Microsoft, but then again, don't discount them just because they are Microsoft. Instead of trying to make better anti-spam software (which they are also doing), they are throwing a lot of money at the root of the cause, both in Congressional lobbying and these suits. Doesn't seem too bad to me.

Aaron

Re:FP?

[MEGAMAID]

basically no direct benefit to them

Are you kidding? I'm sure there is a huge benefit to them in the cost of running Hotmail. Hotmail accounts would be send millions of spam a day.