Slashdot Mirror


Spammer Sentenced to 9 Years in Jail

Iphtashu Fitz writes "Jeremy Jaynes of Raleigh, NC now has the dubious honor of being the first spammer sentenced to jail for the felony of spamming. Virginia judge Thomas Horne sentenced Jaynes to 9 years in prison based on a jury recommendation after he was convicted of sending out 10 million e-mails a day. Jaynes, who sent out much of his spam using the name "Gaven Stubberfield", has held a position on the SpamHaus Registry of Known Spam Operations for a long time. Unfortunately the sentence has been postponed while the case is being appealed." Commentary on the sentence available at Forbes as well.

5 of 565 comments (clear)

  1. Does more harm than good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    Restricting any sort of speach online is a really just one step in practicing for legal and technological control of the content on the internet.

    First they came for the spammers, but I wasn't a spammer, so I did nothing
    Then they came for the copyrighted music theives, but commercial music sucks, so I didn't care
    Then they came for the pornographers, but my tastes are mainstream, so I still didn't care.
    Then they came for F/OSS, but windows was a kinda adequate replacement so I did little
    Finally, they went after political blogs; but by then it was too late.

    Personally, I'd prefer if software vendors simply provided anti-spam filters (perhaps captcha based) and bundled them in a way that people could understand and use.

    There are easy technical solutions. Personally, I simply bounce all HTML email to the sender and ask them to re-send as text, and my account that used to have hundreds of spams a day is now quite plesant to read - maybe one text spam gets through every few days.

  2. Re:good move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    ok, let me come to your house, stuff hundreds of flyers a day at your front door, then say it's an unconstitutional infringement on free speech if i get stopped.

    Excellent Example! I hate that damn physical spam WalMart, Safeway and Best Buy send me infinately more than I hate email spam, because it's much easier to set up a email filter.

    Once those physical-mail spammers go to jail, I'll support this guy going to jail.

    He also has said the law is an unconstitutional infringement of free speech.

    Restricting any sort of speach online is a really just one step in practicing for legal and technological control of the content on the internet.

    First they came for the spammers, but I wasn't a spammer, so I did nothing
    Then they came for the copyrighted music theives, but commercial music sucks, so I didn't care
    Then they came for the pornographers, but my tastes are mainstream, so I still didn't care.
    Then they came for F/OSS, but windows was a kinda adequate replacement so I did little
    Finally, they went after political blogs; but by then it was too late.

    Personally, I'd prefer if software vendors simply provided anti-spam filters (perhaps captcha based) and bundled them in a way that people could understand and use.

    There are easy technical solutions. Personally, I simply bounce all HTML email to the sender and ask them to re-send as text, and my account that used to have hundreds of spams a day is now quite plesant to read - maybe one text spam gets through every few days.

  3. One thing he won't be doing. by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1, Troll

    I don't think he is going to be selling penis lengthening formula to the other guys on his cell-block. He'll be feeling enough pain as it is.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  4. Hopefully by DiscoNick · · Score: 0, Troll

    he gets to take it up the ass with a letter opener to remind him of his crimes.

  5. Re:good move by Threni · · Score: 0, Troll

    > It really says something about society when you can get a harsher penalty for
    > sending spam than you could for premeditated homicide.

    It's just another demonstration of how the law is used to protect money and property, rather than the non-rich.