Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FTC Takes Out Porn- and Botnet-Spewing ISP

Posted by timothy on from the ayn-rand-would-approve dept.

coondoggie writes "The Federal Trade Commission today got a judge to effectively kill off the Internet service provider 3FN, which the agency said specialized in spam, porn, botnets, phishing, and all manner of malicious web content. The ISP's computer servers and other assets have been seized and will be sold by a court and the operation has been ordered give back $1.08 million to the FTC."

6 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    RTFA - "pornography featuring children, violence, bestiality, and incest"

    Not necessarily the most legal porn. Sorry if I'm a sexually-repressed prude for not thinking kiddie porn and bestiality is OK.

  2. Came in for the people who didn't RTFA on Soapbox by ICLKennyG · · Score: 3, Informative

    Found 'em.

    Child porn will generally get you in trouble in just about every western jurisdiction. This is not news. This was not just a singular administrative action born in the middle of the night. This started over a year ago and was the culmination of a legal proceeding where they apparently proved that this entity was actively recruiting nefarious clients to host child porn and other illegal activities.

    This one smacks more of sensationalist summary writing than of government censorship or unconstitutional takings.

  3. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Informative

    I was watching a German TV show the other day, when suddenly a young woman came strolling across the screen topless. Oooops. That's not allowed on U.S. broadcast television (although I wish it was). I'd say we're prudish, or at least the FCC is.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  4. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Informative

    You think child porn is protected by freedom of expression?

    Tell me, whose freedom are you thinking should be protected? The adult or the child? Is it OK if the adult's freedoms infringe on those of the child?

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  5. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by LordNimon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Did somebody actually do it?

    Yes.

    --
    And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
    To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
  6. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by IdolizingStewie · · Score: 3, Informative

    It is a slight misquote of an example used by Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr in the majority decision in Schenck vs the United States. The proper quote is falsely yelling "fire" in a theater.