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."

9 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. Break out the champagne! by peterb · · Score: 5, Funny

    My heart overflows for this poor oppressed Botnet operator.

    1. Re:Break out the champagne! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You should apply bound checking, otherwise someone could exploit it.

  2. Porn? by jspenguin1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "FTC Takes Out Porn, Internet traffic slows to a trickle."

  3. 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.

  4. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 5, Funny

    No more sex in marriage either.

    Way ahead of ya, pal.

    --
    "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
  5. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by oldspewey · · Score: 5, Funny

    This was one of those comments that made me laugh, then immediately made me cry.

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
  6. Re:How is the porn part relevant? by mrsteveman1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    RTFA--they were hosting child pornography sites. That's a whole different animal from the usual porn.

    Which animal is in your usual porn?

  7. 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
  8. Re:What about the providers? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Such a move would serve to stifle admittance onto the internet in general.

    Ultimately, that's probably the aim of the FTC, which is little more than a pro-industry group. This has definitely been the aim of the largest telecoms for at least a decade now.

    They let the internet get away from them. They're still mad that the wild, wooly Internet ever came to exist without their guiding hand from day one.

    The Internet was basically an accident. If it had been started by the "Free Market" it would never have looked anything like the way it looks today, with anybody who gets connectivity having the ability to become a content provider with global reach. Job #1 now is to get it completely under corporate control where (they believe) it should be. They're not going to stop until they are once again the gatekeepers for what people see and do, and every single Internet activity is metered and monetized.

    This is why people like me are so anxious to keep the Internet public, using Net Neutrality laws. We remember how it started, what it was like before there was any corporate presence, and how desperately the largest corporations want to turn it into cable television.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.