Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FTC Tries to Can Sex Spam

Posted by michael on from the closing-the-barn-door dept.

F_SMASH writes "The United States' Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has charged a group of companies and individuals with failing to include required warnings on 'sex' related spam e-mail."

12 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Offshore? by grub · · Score: 4, Interesting


    One of the companies, Global Net Ventures, is based in the UK. How is the US FTC going to charge them?

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Offshore? by AceCaseOR · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I figure that, as they were spamming US Citizens, the FTC's argument is that they were doing business inside the United States, and thus are bound to follow US laws when doing so.

      I'm seriously hoping the FTC wins this suit.

      --
      Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
    2. Re:Offshore? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One of the companies, Global Net Ventures, is based in the UK. How is the US FTC going to charge them?

      Little things like borders have never stopped US authorities before

    3. Re:Offshore? by pjrc · · Score: 5, Informative
      How is the US FTC going to charge them?

      Well, from the MSNBC article:

      But Harrington said the CAN-SPAM Act, which took force last January, makes all firms that engage in affiliate marketing liable for the actions of their sub-contractors.

      "There's a message here for anybody running an affiliate program; you need to monitor what the third parties are doing," she said. "If you are using a business model that recruits others, you are strictly liable for the practices of those third parties. It's not just the people who push the button. It's the business that provides the financial incentive. The law is clear and strict."

      And quoting from the CNN Money article:

      A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order against the defendants that prohibits them from sending similar e-mails and freezes their assets, pending a preliminary hearing.

      Now if all the companies and people involved are outside the US, or they keep all their money stuffed in their mattresses and pay cash for everything, maybe they can just run away.

      But if they've done any banking within the US, they probably stand to lose all their money if they don't show up in court. (now if only groklaw would cover these cases....)

      --
      PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
  2. Easy filtering from here! by MikTheUser · · Score: 5, Funny

    'Cause now we can just set our spam filters to look out for something like "WARNING: This message's content might not be suited for..." right in the subject!

  3. Images in the subject line? by bobbyjack · · Score: 5, Funny
    the FTC claims many of the e-mails revealed sexually explicit words or images in the subject line


    (my emphasis)

    Seriously, are their email clients that display images in the subject line?!
    1. Re:Images in the subject line? by stupidfoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Seriously, are their email clients that display images in the subject line?!

      Somewhere, some PHB at Microsoft is thinking this would be great for Outlook 2005.

  4. The FTC going after spamers is like someone by thesonicboom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    putting their finger in the leak in the dike. The Internet is much bigger than one nation. The solution is going to have to be technological, not regulatory.

  5. (.)(.) Big and Buxom! by OECD · · Score: 4, Funny

    Seriously, are their email clients that display images in the subject line?!

    Piece of cake, mate ;-)

    --
    One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
  6. Sex? by Smallpond · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is it with this administration and sex? Janet Jackson -- huge fine for small tits. Sex spam -- have to stop that right now.

    Why not go after the 419 spammers who are stealing people's life savings? Or how about the fake pills and illegal drugs? Just business, I guess.

  7. Of course they are! by rackhamh · · Score: 4, Funny

    Of course the government is cracking down on sex spam. Just imagine...

    You're a middle-aged guy stuck in a bureacratic position. You spend your days debating horribly dreary points of order and generally struggling to effect any meaningful change...

    Then somebody comes up to you and says, "Hey [your name], wanna drop what you're doing and spend a few weeks/months looking at porn?"

    Yeah, tough decision there.

  8. Likely. by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 4, Informative
    The FTC has gone after Global Web Promotions in Australia. The FTC froze the funds that they had in Canda, along with other locations. Even if they are not in the USA, if they take credit cards, their money flows through the USA.

    Many countries have signed the Hague Convention which include the rules on cross border enforcement of civil judgments.


    --
    Fight Spammers!