Slashdot Mirror
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?"
By getting into the spam business themselves!
Now, hear me out. Microsoft can become the exclusive spammer of Hotmail, and then they can strong arm other ISPs and mail providers into only accepting Microsoft(tm) Spam. Once this is done, they can quickly buy up the other spammers that haven't gone under. Finally, once this is accomplished and they're the only spammer left, they can quietly shut down the operation. Tada, spam is over.
With Microsoft's deep pockets, can they effectively send a resounding message to spammers?
Yeah... Don't spam XXX material... just the regular garbage... Anyone who thinks this is going to make much difference, is either nieve or stupid - possibly both.
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
I for one am flabergasted. Amazed.Yet confused... There is no way to describe it. Or am I dreaming? [too much coffee?] Is Microsoft actually trying to HELP the standard Internet user? hmmm... thats a new one for sure!
_
Free 27" Sony WEGA TV
Out of curiosity, why is Microsoft bothering to litigate?
Surely, the amount of money they spend doing this outweighs the "brownie points" they'll be winning.
And, why wouldn't they just focus on writing anti-spam filtering software, and then _sell_ it as a solution to the spam problem? (In that light, shouldn't they be _encouraging_ more spammers so that they can sell more anti-spam software, or perhaps better convince people to switch to an "enhanced" Outlook 200x?)
I have to say despite all the M$ hatred we all feel for their many security flaws and and horrible software for once I think Microsoft may be acting in the best intrests of the community, with basically no direct benefit to them. Even if it doesn't kill spam (which I don't think anything has the possibility of doing) it might shut down a few or few hundred spammers, and that is a start. I have to say for once I have some nice feelings toward the evil monopoly.
Philosophy.
The United States of America (USA) 'runs' on money. Cash. Credit. Status.
Anything can happen when you're rich. You can be president, the head of an national power company, or even the supposed 'good guy' in the fight against Internet freedom from solicitation.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Of course, no matter how much they spend, we'll probably always be seeing viagra spam in our hotmail boxes. Perhaps in addition to this set of lawsuits (which benefit everybody, don't get me wrong), they should throw in a campaign to work on giving the Hotmail spam filters an overhaul. It might help the community a great deal if Microsoft were to push some of their development over to spam filtering, as well as integrating some of the better email authentication systems into Hotmail, Outlook and the like.
Are there any published studies about how much spam could be reduced if Microsoft could place more effective anti-spam features into the OS itself
Don't get me wrong, I think this is a great step forward, but I think (supposing spammers aren't a little more intimidated) that we might see a better reduction in spam if better precautions were to be taken. Sorry if I've missed any big features mixed in with Windows that might help with this, I don't pay much attention to the patching that goes in as far as email is concerned.
Ryan
let's see... Red Sox won World Series as well.
Well, the apocalypse is on it's way... better start repenting and whatnot.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
...this feels strange...
If you steal this sig, the only people who will profit are professional criminals.
Err sorry ... forgot that they are the Evil Empire!
I recently read that Bill Gates has the most spammed e-mail address in the world. Microsoft is simply following a game-plan to sue all the spammers that aggravate Mr. Gates.
I don't know who to root for! 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? I'm so confused...
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.
do we like Microsoft now?
I have no
Surely somebody in the 80s must have patented 'an electronic method of distributing junk mail without permission, including false redirection to addresses for the installation of extra product services".
suing whoever the hell worte outlook. oh wait..
But what I wonder, is why isn't Moft going after the spyware and all that put stuff on your machine that, if you remove it, it makes your machine act funky? Isn't that damaging their product, IE?, or sometimes even Windblows itself is messed up.
Spam is a nuisance, but the adware and spyware are, imho, what are the biggest threat to people's computers. Of course, far be it from me to complain, because I make a liiiiittle on the side cleaning up machines over and over and over a freaking gain, but really, I think Moft should go out and start nailing some of these folks hard.
(btw, Moft means Microsoft)
That's my two cents, I expect no one to pay any attention to it, lol.
Karma: Bad is the liberal way of saying this guy won't drink the kool aid here on slash dot. I wear my Karma with pride
I think they aren't quite sure who they're suing, so they make it "John Doe" at such and such address, DBA so and so. Spammers are a slippery lot.
Notice they're only suing pornographers. As if that's the only annoying spam.
I get spammed regularly to sign up for Microsoft's certification classes. I know that because it goes in my 'caughtspam' folder, whereupon I delete it.
sigs, as if you care.
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.
Finally, M$ has finally sued the right person...they did something right..... wow, slap me please for saying that.
"RIAA/MPAA is currently litigating. With RIAA/MPAA's deep pockets, can they effectively send a resounding message to pirates?"
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
Actually, if you RTFA, they're suing more than just "pornographers"... Aaron
Notice they're only suing pornographers. As if that's the only annoying spam.
Well, it is the most annoying spam. Especially if you have little kids you would like to get email addresses for.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a bible thumping anti-porn type of person, but some of the spam stuff is just vile (and some is illegal), and it is pushed to you instead of requested.
Finkployd
I might actually get laid soon, then?
Well, do you want the short answer or the long answer.
No.
I guess that was both.
How is this flamebait? This is the truth.
I see a somewhat irreputable group.. making use of Free Speech.
KKK rallies are allowed to romp through cities, and the ACLU fights for them.
Black Pride groups also protest through towns.. Ditto the ACLU.
Considering what the KKK supports (death to Blacks, Catholics, and jews), and what spammers want (sell you stuff).. Why are we against spammers?
It's both speech. Why are both vehemently hated but only 1 is tolerated?
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.
Waking Up - There must be a better way to start the day.
Are there damages? Can suing spammers actually be a revenue stream for MS?
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
DDoS them, sue them, whatever it takes I guess. Maybe we can't stop them from changing ISP's and moving servers around to avoid attacks, but maybe M$ can eventually bankrupt them. Use evil to fight evil?
If they want to cut junk mail, why did they increase the storage space?
"Considering what the KKK supports (death to Blacks, Catholics, and jews), and what spammers want (sell you stuff).. Why are we against spammers?"
Because the right to Free Speech (in the US) specifically protects political speech. The KKK, as horrible as it is, is engaging in political dialogue, and it's important for the proper functioning of democracy that political dialogue be protected. And, in particular, it's only unpopular political speech requires active protection.
Spammers, on the other hand, are simply bugging people to sell them stuff. That's not protected speech.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
It might even work as well as the lawsuits against filesharers.
In all seriousness, if the passage of the law changed nothing, likely the lawsuits will only stop those targeted, and ten will spring up to replace the one that got nailed. They also can do next to nothing about spammers outside the US. So, while I have to give a (rare) salute to Microsoft on this one, I don't think it'll do much to stem the flood.
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
Hahaha, Microsoft is supposed to be an evil corporation! LOL, now everybody's going to act confused! See, because they usually bash Microsoft, they'll make dumb posts that supposedly point out the irony to get them funny points! OMFGROFL it's so FUNNY!
I hate M$... but do I hate spam more?
it's the the elections; which peice of scum do you vote for? (I'm candian btw; so I'm talking canadian politics here)
I guess we all loose whoever wins.
K Man
...by pointing their DNS records to microsoft.com and waiting for Lycos to strike.
Go Microsoft?
Microsoft is the good guy?
Hummmm must be a full moon...
Spyware and malware is partly their fault. If they really want to clean up their own image, apologize and take on the jerks who cause so much frustration. This stuff is killing productivity, costs millions, and drives people crazy.
Spam's got nothing on spyware.
There is a difference though, detestable as the type of organisations you mention are, you can (partially) ignore them by closing your windows or turning off the radio. Many of the spammers are actively breaking into peoples machines and then using them to spread their messages. Would the ACLU defend the KKK if they broke into somebody's home and smashed the windows so that the passing march could be heard? If they then go hang some of their propaganda on the walls of that home, using the 'advertising' space to spread their message would they still be defended on civil liberties grounds?
There's freedom of speech and then there's interfering with another person's property.
---Because the right to Free Speech (in the US) specifically protects political speech. The KKK, as horrible as it is, is engaging in political dialogue, and it's important for the proper functioning of democracy that political dialogue be protected. And, in particular, it's only unpopular political speech requires active protection.
---Spammers, on the other hand, are simply bugging people to sell them stuff. That's not protected speech.
Have you ever seen a filibuster in Senate? That's when there's slim majority to vote on a bill, but not enough to stop people from taking the podium.. The actual filibuster is when the senators read from long books. The phone book is common, but about 10 or so years ago, another book was much more common: Sears Roebuck Catalog.
Is this political speech, or is it commerical?
Or how about somebody actively saying how good a product is. And they do this at the state fair, so that your comment goes through the airwaves.
Is this political speech, or commerical speech (Assuming this was an honest opinion with no money transferring hands)?
Or the other group of spammers that the government supports... Snail mail spam. Credit card offers, repair offers, "Checks" that grant you a loan if cashed, items with threats attached threatening your credit if you dont send money or item back....
Yeah, the companies spend money on this, but so what? It's still bulk that fills mailboxes. And it's NOT digitally preprossable to stop junk.
Or even the CAN-SPAM law itself.. It explicitly ALLOWS politicians and political surveys to still solicit. Yes, they are ABOVE THE LAW. Why?
The "freedom of speech" that the ACLU is protecting in the case of the KKK protest is drastically different than the "speech" of spammers.
Suppose a KKK rally group walked in your front door and "demonstrated" in your living room. Freedom of speech certainly doesn't protect the action of trespassing.
The root of the difference is that the KKK demonstration is held in a public place. You can go home to get away from it. Spammers send spam to your email account. Your particular email address/server/ISP, etc are all privately "owned" things, similar to your house. Freedom of speech and demonstration of the masses do not trump the right to privacy (or the property rights) of the individual.
KKK rallies are allowed to romp through cities
But they're not allowed to come into people's houses and harrass them. Not if they don't want to be charged with trespassing and breaking & entering--and that's assuming the house owner's shotgun doesn't do them in first (assuming the state has sane home defence laws). That's the difference.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
You have the right to speak. You don't have the right to force me to listen, and make me pay for the priveledge of doing so.
---Until the KKK tries to host a rally in my front lawn, I'll tolerate them and prosecute spammers all I want.
Have you ever witnissed a friend have a large burning cross placed in their lawn??
I'm sure it will put a damper on things. When AOL, Earthlink and MS sue spammers, it must have an effect, but spam will only stop once Cisco sells spam filtering routers that will drop all spam packets on the floor.
Oh well, what the hell...
And you bring upon yet another MUCH MORE important fact about the Internet, and your connection in particular...
Why are you paying for upload bandwidth? You can control downloads, not uploads. And also, why dont you have a basic shell account with procmail filters? Procmail on your mailservers cut a lot of crap if configured right. Simply deleting all mails with incorrect send-to: field kills much spam.
With Microsoft's deep pockets, can they effectively send a resounding message to spammers?
Yes. That message is "Don't spam *.microsoft.com with t3h pr0n!" We don't really have anything to do with what you spam others with.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Or do they contract with spammers?
Perhaps they run afoul of the brown-paper law
Most of the spam I received came from Hotmail mail boxes.
Linux at home
And in this case, the perpetrator can be prosecuted for trespass (and probably arson). That's when their actions have crossed the line from protected, political speech into an invasion of privacy and a dangerous act.
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
Could it be that Microsoft is trying to generate some positive news for itself at a time when even the average Joe and Josephine are pissed because their Microsoft OSes are trashed after being on the net for a few hours? Or is Microsoft doing this Spam battle out of the goodness of their hearts?
Curious, but the invective hurled against Microsoft by average non-geek folks certainly has exploded recently: Seems even grandmas understand Microsoft sold them a pretty bag full of moths, metaphorically speaking.
This could make for an interesting ending of the Microsoft con: The greedy, gluttonous dragon devours its own heart and falls over dead.
Add your own happily-ever-after line here.
Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
So if hell froze over does that mean everything I said about "...when hell freezes over" came true? Uh-oh.
Uh-oh??? Are you kidding? There are some girls I need to call right now!
...making them illegal doesn't necessarily mean people will stop doing them.
If you make spam illegal and prosecute the people sending it, you basically force businesses who respect the law out of the market, and what remains are the businesses with no respect for the law: organized criminals
The mob's next frontier is spam, and spam's next frontier is the mob. I don't think this is an improvement.
It will not do anything to stop the spead of spam, and this is why:
These 120 spammers represent a very small section of the entire spammer population, and I doubt that they've got big guys like Ralsky on it. You won't see M$ getting anywhere near the spam gangs, either. In fact, when you think about it, M$ is the reason some spam gangs even exist! Think about all the security holes in XP that allow it to be hijacked and used as a spam relay. Also, think about the "open-relay-by-default" nature of some M$ mailserver products. Maybe these lawsuits are Microsoft's way of saying "Our bad!"
Given the difficulty/cost of tracking down spammers and nailing them, I think it will just turn spamming into a different industry. The (smart) spammers will just go farther underground and become more sophisticated in their ways of avoiding detection/liability. These 120 guys were probably just amateurs that didn't know what they were doing anyway.
Due to the sheer high number of spammers, it is difficult to reduce spam by suing them. There are thousands of spammers out there and it is not possible for a company of even Microsoft's standing to go after each of them. Suing 120 out of thousands is far from sending aresounding message. The only thing that can restrict spamming is a strict federal law.
After all, suing spammers is good PR and it is a lot cheaper than rebuilding windows 2K/XP to fix them. They chose to put their money on longhorn. Personnaly, I agree with their strategy, even if I do not believe that longhorn will be functionnal in its first releases.
Or is this right now just limited to Corporations?
...I must have missed how this was different from Fascism
Most of the spam you received claimed to come from Hotmail mail boxes.
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
what is this..... football of which you speak?
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
I'm saying this very seriously. They probably run the world's busiest email domain, and get a shitload of spam. If they cooperated with the community, via dcc, or even just by publishing their own blocklist -- other ISPs could start using that list tomorrow to kill pretty much all spam sources.
But Microsoft don't share, I don't buy this bull about how MS is trying to end spam. It would take 2 of their engineers and one week to set up a very effective blocklist just based on the garbage being thrown at hotmail all the time. Then the world would know about virtually all spam sources.
It would be interesting to know how much spam is a direct result of owned windoze boxes versus the amount they will stop with lawyers taking a few spammers to court.
Oh, yea. If they could fix problems with programmers they would not be hiring lawyers.
"Because of you anti spam whacko zealots who dont know how to delete an email message .. people's civil liberties are going down the tube and the govt. is hunting down people who are just trying to make a living .. freaking DEAL WITH THE GODDAMN INCONVENIENCE.
.. but they want to skin alive anyone who causes them 1 second of delay. And yes an individual email only takes up one second of your time. I understand you get lots of spam from different sources .. but how can you punish someone who's doing what a lot of others are doing .. The punishments that the spammers receive is assymetrical revenge considering that the particular individual actually only cause one or two seconds of inconvenience per victim."
.. but how can you punish someone who's doing what a lot of others are doing .."
People dont mind rapists and murderes getting away
Let's assume you're correct in saying it only takes 2 seconds per message, although I think it takes a bit more.
If we assume 1 million copies of the message are sent out and reach someone's inbox, that's 2000000 seconds, or about 555.5 hours, collectively taken by that spammer.
If we assume that all these people were making a mere $8 an hour, that's now $4444.00 that spammer has cost.
That's not very realistic, though. Let's assume that 5 million messages found their way into some inboxes, and all the people were paid $25/hour and it took them 5 seconds to delete.
5000000*5/60/60*25 == $173611.12
Now, with about 100 messages a day finding their way into the average inbox (wild guess), that's $17,361,112.00 it has cost.
Still think it's a minor inconvenience?
"I understand you get lots of spam from different sources
So because Hitler killed a shit-load of jews (yes I know, some law about the longer a usenet thread continues, the more likely a comparison to Hitler & Nazis is...) and was never punished for it (he killed himself before anyone else got to him), we should let other people attempt to kill off a race without punishing them as long as they kill themselves once they're done?
Come on, that's just weak.
ND
This statement is forty-five characters long.
Because one is for commercial gain the other has to do with being able to express your political views. It is the same reason you can restrict cigaret ads from television.
just because your a schizophrenic doesn't mean people arn't really out to get you
When spammers hijack granny's cable modem, and waste my bandwidth with unsolicited mail, jacking up my hosting costs, they are doing illegal things for which they are liable. This is not free speech, this is theft of resources.
Go Microsoft! Beat the crap out of that .01% of all spammers!
...
Wait!
*realization that this actually helps Microsoft*
Go spammers! Put up a legal defense! Beat the monolithic corporation that's about to kick your collective ass.
*realization that I'm cheering for the spammers*
/Mikael
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
We still hate Microsoft, but we like that they're suing spammers.
If two people you really don't like kill each other, you can still hate them even though they both did you a favor.
paintball
The company is diversifying into... penis extensions!
A whole new meaning to "embrace and extend".
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Aren't all of Microsoft's lawyer's busy fending off other lawsuits? Where are they going to find time to keep the company out of court AND sue spammers?
I have this really funny quote that I like to put here. Unfortunately, there's this really annoying thing called a char
Microsoft provides DNS and mail service hosting to the large scale lottery scam. /dev/null.
Next time you receive one of these ("you have won a big price in the lottery") check the domain name you are supposed to send mail to. Usually some variation on "cashchangeukltd.com".
Do a whois on it. In 99% of cases, it has been registered by Microsoft!
The "technical contact" is an address that only sends an auto-reply tellig you another address (pdbeta@microsoft.com). That one is linked to
When you send a mail to the mentioned cashchange address, it usually returns after a few days with some "mailbox overflow" or "could not contact mailserver" reply *FROM HOTMAIL*.
So, Microsoft are fully in the position to do something with this. Yet, they ignore all abuse mail about this topic.
Microsoft isn't so bad... in my opinion if they help the enforcement is the open-source development of better email protocols. AOL isnt so bad either, they too are changing for the better giving their members virus scan for free... So, maybe we ought to hate them less, and give them a 2nd chance...
Spam is useless information right? We should get Bill to close down the internet! Stupid useless Internet, i wish wish it was edible at least!
---- I dedicate this post to Steveo, Billy and Linny
With Microsoft's deep pockets, can they effectively send a resounding message to spammers?"
I hope so. My penis is now 20 m long, I have about fifty Rolexes and don't get me started about the amount of MS software I have crammed in my closets!
-- Cheers!
There used to be a time where we all actually opened emails from strangers in other countries.
E.g., when I wrote that walkthrough of mine and put my real email address in it (again, spam was not yet a problem), it never occured to me that I'd ever want to discriminate against, say, gamers from Korea if they have questions.
E.g., when I posted on newsgroups, I actually expected that some people would answer privately per email. No point in dragging the whole thread off-topic, after all. Some of them were, yes, in other countries. If I was talking about Linux or about 3D programming in assembly, I wasn't going to reject potentially valuable information from someone just because their email info is from Elbonia.
The fact that nowadays email addresses are some jealously guarded family secret, and that we're gladly blocking whole countries or continents, is the effect of spam that I hate the most. It just shows the extent of the damage these fucks have done to this public resource.
So, well, in fact I actually aggree to your point of view. Let them flee if they want to. Then we can block just the countries which still encourage them, and maybe reclaim our communication resource to the rest of them. Having a usable communication channel even to just half the world, is better than what we have today.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Can't Microsoft revise their EULA to state that their OS cannot be used for spamming? and that the license will be revoked by Microsoft if caught doing so?
Sure, this might move the spammer off Windows when caught, but configuring a Linux type system would be beyonf the capabilities of some spammers.
Your post advocates a
( ) technical (x) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which vary from state to state.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
(x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
(x) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires cooperation from too many of your friends and is counterintuitive
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever worked
( ) Other:
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
(x) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(x) Asshats
(x) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
(x) Technically illiterate politicians
(x) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
( ) Other:
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures cannot involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures cannot involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
(x) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
( ) Other:
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Nice try, dude, but I don't think it will work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
In Redmond only old people sue spammers.
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
...we can convince Mr. Gates that those computer generated 'cease and desist' orders from the RIAA are spam...
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Let's face it, for the average user spam is little more than annoying. I understand that it causes a significant amount of network traffic, but I've never had to fix a neighbor or family member's computer because of spam. Viruses, trojans, worms, adware and spyware are a different story. I've never seen spam grind a system to a halt.
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).
..and the winner is *drumroll* lawyers!
Oh. Wait. Now we got three evils...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I would love to see Bill's reaction when he gets one of those.
I think this is just the semifinals of the "IT Industry" Conference of the US Civil Justice Championship. M$ beat the DoJ and Netscape to get here, SCO beat Novell (and had a bye) and is currently matched against IBM. Winner of these two go head-to-head for the championship. Personally I'd like to see SCO vs the spammers for purely satanic reasons.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
Consider the state and federal legistlators standing up to spammers (i.e. grandstanding ineffectively for positive PR). Microsoft is likely doing the same...just they are smart enough to know it is only a stunt. Billy Joe Bob state congressman might think he is doing some good.
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
I assume you are also against laws that stop people spamming with fax machines too, right? Even though it costs the recepiant?
Email spam costs, it isn't free to transport it across the network, but like with faxes the sender doesn't foot the bill.
I also object to being harassed, which is what spam amounts it. I don't want to wade through it, I don't want to spend my time on it, but what about my rights? Must I give up on email because of other people's right to "free speech"?.
Does your ideal of free speech include the right to go around holding up porn pictures to kids? Should that be protected? Sending porn spam to kids?
Living in a society requires some compromises, you recognise that yourself when you say "with exceptions". They may the only exceptions you want, but most societies (including the US) seem to want a few more.
Conversely, if someone's at work checking his/her email, and this person is cleaning the inbox (rather than simply reading the actual work-related mail), he/she is probably doing this during the fuck-around part of the work day, usually right after lunch or early in the morning. The person would be considerably unlikely to be doing any real work anyway, so if there were no spam to delete he/she would probably be hanging out at the water cooler or getting a cup of coffee anyway. Your numbers are still relevant but they should be greatly trimmed down.
HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
You pay in time, and our ISP pays moving the messages around, and dealing with spam, and the costs get passed on.
People just want an email account, becuase there are technical ways to reduce spam doesn't makie it any better. There are technical ways to reduce burglary too, but that doesn't excuse it.
Method
The KKK have a much more obnoxious message, but are easy to ignore. The spammers have a (sometimes) less obnoxious message, but a much more intrusive and costly method of forcing that message on people who wish to ignore it.
With the exceptions of actually illegal spam content, nobody is saying the spammers can't try and sell their wares, they object to how. If someone put up posters all over my house without my permission, I'd be pissed at them whatever the message.
Because the spammers probably violate some obscure patent on spamming that microsoft holds.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
All you losers .. WHO CARES ABOUT SPAM?
People's civil liberties and not suffering from anti-spam laws (maybe other things, but that is off topic). They exist for the same reasons their are laws against unsolicited fax spamming. It costs people other than the sender, and the receiver didn't ask to receive it.
It is method, not content, that is the problem. Nobody's right to try and sell stuff is being harmed.
If someone came around and put up posters advertising stuff all over your house, would you just "DEAL WITH THE GODDAMN INCONVENIENCE" of removing them? No? Think how much of people's time is wasted by millions of spam emails. You are talking years.
Most anti-spam laws do allow spam if it has opt out, doesn't spoof the sender and sometimes has to be labled.
No idea where you get "People dont mind rapists and murderes getting away" from. Maybe on planet Troll, but down here, yes they very much do.
Well, ya. It's the same message they have for all of us. "Make a deal with us or face the consequences."
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
Man, I find it really eye opening when multi-billion user license business take on immorality. I figure when people can you a liar, and a thief, and not be wrong; Its time to shut up, and not be noticeable.
Of course there is the soap opera of one horses ass attacking another horses ass, because lets face it, there ARE more horses asses, than horses.
YOU'VE had it!?!?
What about those poor guys in the government just trying to make a living?
Of course, don't worry about the guys like me. I'm the one that has to explain to the CFO why we have to purchase all this software to combat SPAM.
And I wouldn't bother to combat it at all -- except that I keep being called into differnet company Vice President's office and am shown SPAM with those lovely explicit pictures that would embarrass a gynecologist and have to explain myself. AS IF I SENT THEM, RIGHT?!
Now you and I know why they "just don't get it". But they are trying to protect the OTHER folks in the office from these offensive pictures and imputations about inadequate anatomy. Let's not even bother mentioning the waste of productivity because they are trying to make a living.
So you see, I HAVE to SOLVE it. And guess what? I'm just trying to make a living too.
So, since these folks sending them OBVIOUSLY don't care about me, don't be so naive and act surprised that I don't care about them. OK?
Grow up.
Lou
No, no, no... You got it all wrong. What MS is trying to do is LICENSE this to spam companies. Most spam is targeted at Windoze computers isn't it? Therefore, MS will want to ensure they can collect their share of the $$. Otherwise, MS can just sue them for non-licensed Windoze compatable software!
Homer no function beer well without.
That's probably why I haven't gotten my payment yet for testing his new email system. I'm sure it will come to me as soon as he reads through all that junk.
Qxe4
Let's assume you're correct in saying it only takes 2 seconds per message, although I think it takes a bit more.
Although that might be accurate for your average blue color worker, in the tech field your estimate fails to consider the time lost reading spam stories on slashdot. I spend far more time reading about spam problems than dealing with the problem.
Qxe4
Unless checking that email is actually part of work, like where I work for example (video production) that we use email regularly to send and receive scripts for videos, pictures to add to them and audio (music and speech) in MP3 format to work with until we receive the definitive high quality versions, just to name the few things we've used it for this week alone.
"Or even the CAN-SPAM law itself.. It explicitly ALLOWS politicians and political surveys to still solicit. Yes, they are ABOVE THE LAW. Why?"
Betcause (to repeat myself) in the US political speech is protected by the Constitution. The CAN-SPAM law cannot limit political speech, or it would be overturned in the courts as unconstitutional.
I can't understand the point of the rest of your post. Could you please explain again?
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
If you don't think it's a problem, why didn't you post YOUR e-mail address?
An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us