Slashdot Mirror
$1 Billion Awarded in Lawsuit Against Spammers
phoric writes "In what is believed the be the largest federal judgement in history against spammers, an ISP from eastern Iowa was awarded a $1 billion dollar judgement against three mass-mailing companies, which were said to be sending up to 10 million e-mail messages per day to the small internet provider."
That's a lot of money per email. When I saw the headline, I figured most of the money came from putative damages, but the article didn't mention it. Instead they were able to claim the amount from actual damages. This leads me to think that this law might not stick around for a while. It was also interesting that no lawyers were present for the trial.
I disagree with this ruling. When we start marking certain sent data as objectionable and unsolicited it creates a problem that it is possible to redefine any data as unwanted, and charge the sender. This also creates a lack of responibility atmosphere, instead of the administrator setting up some barriers, they will simply sue the other companies out of business. As far as I can gather from the article, these companies did not setup zombies inside his network, they were, they were sending mass mail to him directly. If he was smart, a quality firewall would cut them off. (But hey, using the law to win yourself a theoretical one billion that none of those companies have, sounds like a good reason to be incompetent on the job) This reminds me of the FCC, and how electronic devices must recieve harmful interference, instead of being hardend. Same case with spam, instead of companies trying to harden themseleves agaist it (many tools freely available, and many more comercial solutions) then turn to the goverenment to have them babysit them. (Which is rather threatening when someone with knowledge and a purpose steps in and abuses the systems, (spammers/crackers/ terroists? (aka the boogy man)))
The trial was a bench trial and the spammers did not show up, nor did their lawyers show up (if they had any). It was effectively a trial in absentia. Reporters were unable to track down anyone associated with the defendants. It appears that they have "disappeared".
"I believe under the CAN-SPAM act, you cannot anyway."
The CAN-SPAM Act is a shining example of what you get when legislators do not have *one* clue what is going on, but make laws anyway.
You ought to have to pass a test to be a legislator, judge, or even a damn dog catcher.
Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
Why not just work with credit card merchants. Many of these spams are for crap you can buy with a credit card.
...
So have police [or a taskforce] use specially marked cards [that otherwise appear like a credit card to the spammer]. Then when the merchant puts the transaction through their details are sent back to the task force.
e.g.
1. Get spam
2. Go there, buy shit
3. They try to collect with merchant
4. They then get a knock on the door a day later from the FBI or something.
Spammers already don't accept money orders and cheques [for obvious reasons] so let's make them afraid of credit cards as well.
And before anyone thinks this is entrapment step #1 takes care of that. They're selling to you without solicitation.
Aside from that I also really don't understand why spammers spam. I mean I don't know what a r0llex is, can't use any v1@gra and really can't afford a hom3 l0@n at the moment. So why bother emailing me over and over and over again.
I'm sure if I wanted herbal penis meds I'd already be in business transaction with the spammer anyways.
Oh well, can always just stop using email I guess.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
But until they can get the collection process started I question it's value.
I'm sure there is no shortage for offers of "insurance" that they will get the money. Many speculators with money would like to gamble and say, "we'll give you 1,000,000 in cash now if you sign over all the rights to the settlement to us." And like a bondsman, they will go after the spammer with millions of dollars worth of paid goons to collect. With a price like that on the spammer's head, there's no escape in this small world.
A lot of spam might come from outside the US, but it's usually at the direction of people in the US. (I'll bet that these people used a lot of out-sourced web sites in China and such, but the money trail led back to the US.)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
I followed the link and put in a fake name - a name I have never used anywhere else - but provided them with my real office phone number. Because it dealt with mortgages, I knew someone who had sufficient ties to my jurisdiction would respond if they wanted to sell me a mortgage.
I had over 40 fricking banks and mortgage brokers call me using that fake name! So what did I do? I sued the bastards.
Now, whether or not I believe them when they say that they didn't know that their leads were generated by spam, the judge in this particular case (who didn't know very much at all about the technology or economics of spam) said that, as a matter of law, they were not liable under my state's spam laws. However, before they were dismissed from the case, I was able, through discovery, to learn where they purchased those leads. So although I have dismissed the banks and brokers, I have named as defendants the companies who sold them the leads (which, I was surprised to learn, were also in my jurisdiction). My plan is to trace that fake name all the way back to the company that first sold it to somebody else.In seeing how much money these banks and brokers pay for leads, it is understandable why spammers take the risk of a judgment such as the one in this Iowa case - they are making money hand over fist!
No Inflation Taxation without Representation
I run my own mail server, so am I a ISP? Can I
sue these bastards for using my bandwith sending me unsolicited crap. What is the definition of ISP in reguards the the can spam act?
Got Code?
There are collection agencies out there who will pursue judgements against defendents who lose court cases. In this case, the ISP can identify the person or people behind each company with the help of ROKSO, spamhaus, and friends. He can then get the judgement directly named against them, then sell the judgement on. Collection agencies are bottom feeding scum, just like spammers, so they'll have no problem in mucking around the trailer parks of south florida.
Collection agencies will keep a percentage of the money recovered, anywhere from 20% to 90%, depending on the difficulty in getting the money. They are persistent, and tend to circumvent inconveniences like bankruptcies or moving from state to state. They'll grab money from a bank account, after showing the bank officer the original judgement, then let the defendent return to court to try and get it back. Habeus Cashus.
With a billion dollars in judgements, I would bet there are a handful of sleazy but effective collection agencies who will take on the debt knowing they'll be able to collect small amounts here and there for the life of the spammers. It all depends on grabbing the cash before the other agencies.
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
Don't be more of a fool than you have to be. He had enough email servers for his 5,000 customers, but he didn't have enough for the 10,000,000 emails per day they were receiving, and there's no reason he should have. He had no reason to expect that much incoming email, so he wasn't prepared for it. Not only that, the email wasn't just from those three companies. They were three of the offenders that he managed to identify and who didn't bother to contest his suit. Who knows how many other spammers were deluging him? For that matter, are there still suits open against other spammers that did show up? I don't know, and clearly, neither do you.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Eventually, however, my hatred for spam led me to file the complaint. The mortgage spams are so blatantly fraudulent ... misleading subject lines, messages that state outright that you are already involved in this fake company, and then you are led to a fake bank Web site with fake FDIC logos and Verisign security certificates - lies from end-to-end. (No Slashdotters are going to fall for this, but think of the grandmothers!).
And these companies, whether they realized or not, are funding this international criminal conspiracy. They should have fricken thanked me (and actually one or two of them did off the record).
No Inflation Taxation without Representation