Slashdot Mirror


Florida Man Behind 100 Million Robocalls Hit With $120 Million FCC Fine (chicagotribune.com)

In a massive strike, the Federal Communications Commission issued a $120 million fine on a massive robocall spoofing operation it deemed a threat to public safety. From a report: The FCC announced Thursday morning that it would leverage the fine against Adrian Abramovich, a Miami man who the commission said made almost 100 million spoofed robocalls over a three-month period at the end of 2016. The FCC argued that Abramovich's operation made the phony calls to trick consumers into answering them and listening to his advertising messages. The fine was based on 80,000 spoofed calls the commission had verified.

A complaint filed by the FCC against Abramovich in June 2017 alleged he had broken the Truth in Caller ID Act -- which prohibits callers from falsifying caller ID information to disguise their identity with intent to harm or defraud -- in perpetrating "one of the largest -- and most dangerous -- illegal robocalling campaigns that the commission has ever investigated."

145 comments

  1. Capital Punishment? by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

    1. Re:Capital Punishment? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't believe in capital punishment, not when there is something a LOT worse...Hoe Squad. In the south we have farm prisons and hoe squad, where they chunk your ass out in a field at the crack of dawn and work your ass like a dog until dusk....day after day after day.

      This is a hell of a deterrent, I even had to LMAO at an episode of cops where they chased a criminal in a car covered in flames who refused to stop until he crossed the border to the next state. When the cops asked him "Man what is wrong with you? You could have killed yourself over a simple theft charge, why didn't you just stop?" and he said "Didn't want to go to the hoe squad" and promptly confessed to a robbery in the state he had just made it to LOL.

      You want to teach someone that what they did wasn't the smartest thing? Throw their ass on a hoe squad, trust me they won't forget it.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    2. Re:Capital Punishment? by subanark · · Score: 2

      I completely disagree with you, since:
      1. We should not practice eye for an eye.
      2. He did not take away our lifespan, he took away our ability to be productive or "have fun". I think jail does that too.
      3. We have partly ourselves to blame for making this easy to accomplish.

    3. Re:Capital Punishment? by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

      Death by 1000 cuts seems an appropriate method

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    4. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what difference does it make what state he confessed in? he'd be extradited to and tried in the state where the crime was committed.

    5. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what else works really well? In Saudi Arabia, they will chop of the hand of people convicted of theft. It's more than just a deterrent, it actually makes it much more difficult to steal again. Impossible, in fact, if you get caught twice. Fuck yeah.

    6. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a hoe squad whore, stop cheerleading, it confuses the jackoffs.

    7. Re:Capital Punishment? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

      I think his phone number should be made public and distributed to everyone that got robocalled. And he be barred from getting a new phone number.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    8. Re:Capital Punishment? by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I completely disagree with you, since:
      1. We should not practice eye for an eye.
      2. He did not take away our lifespan, he took away our ability to be productive or "have fun". I think jail does that too.
      3. We have partly ourselves to blame for making this easy to accomplish.

      1. Assertion without justification
      2. Taking away ones ability to be productive or "have fun" is stealing a piece of someones life of which they will never get back
      3. This is like blaming a homeowner that is burglarized because he didn't lock the doors or have a security system installed and made it too easy on criminals. Totally illogical.

    9. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because he'll be held in the state where he confessed, at the end of which time the state with the hoe squad will have lost interest.

    10. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Our system does not enshrine eye-for-eye justice in criminal law pretty much anywhere, read for yourself.
      2. Which is a civil case unless a crime was provably committed, in which case that's criminal law first, then civil.
      3. The system being insecure is not a valid defense against this criminal complaint, but it does factor into the motive and intent of the actor in question and thus sentencing factors somewhat.

    11. Re:Capital Punishment? by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

      This. Somehow, people are afraid about travelling by plane but don't think twice before entering a car, despite the chance of dying in the latter being many times higher. Or, they are more than a bit hateful against concentration camp operators while having no ill will against those running a coal power plant, despite the latter causing more deaths and sickness (concentration not death camp, distinction is important!)? A robber who takes a few $150 cell phones can land multiple years in the slammer while a bank executive who deprives millions of their livelihood gets a slap-on-the-wrist fine, if anything at all.

      A single spamming or robo call campaign can take multiple life spans from the victims. Let's have the punishment take this into account.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    12. Re:Capital Punishment? by nwaack · · Score: 5, Funny

      I had a different image in my head when I read 'hoe squad.'

    13. Re:Capital Punishment? by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know what else works really well? In Saudi Arabia, they will chop of the hand of people convicted of theft. It's more than just a deterrent, it actually makes it much more difficult to steal again. Impossible, in fact, if you get caught twice. Fuck yeah.

      Also makes it virtually impossible for that person to ever hold a respectable or half-way decent job and virtually dooming him to a life of ostracism, poverty, and whatever crimes he can still commit. At the very least he is now dependent on government support for survival.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    14. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We used to have that in the south. It was called slavery. Seeing as blacks are incarcerated at a substantially higher rate than whites it looks like your hoe squad isn't much different. Now all we need is more BS felonies to tack on so we can increase our slave labor force. I assume the good ole boys down south will let us good white folk by with wink and a nod. After all they are good Christians and understand that them degenerate negros must be controlled. /figure out if its sarcasm

    15. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I completely disagree with you, since:
      1. We should not practice eye for an eye.
      2. He did not take away our lifespan, he took away our ability to be productive or "have fun". I think jail does that too.
      3. We have partly ourselves to blame for making this easy to accomplish.

      1. Assertion without justification
      2. Taking away ones ability to be productive or "have fun" is stealing a piece of someones life of which they will never get back
      3. This is like blaming a homeowner that is burglarized because he didn't lock the doors or have a security system installed and made it too easy on criminals. Totally illogical.

      1. Assertion without justification
      2. Assertion without justification
      3. Assertion without justification
      4. Assertion without justification

      Wow I'm really digging your argument style.

    16. Re:Capital Punishment? by jm007 · · Score: 1, Troll

      why are you feeling guilty for something you didn't do? bet you're a whitey who's been convinced he should shoulder the guilt of others just because of his skin color.... inflicting racism back on yourself is just as stupid as inflicting upon others

    17. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the south we have farm prisons and hoe squad

      No you don't. Such a thing would be indentured servitude/slavery and cruel and unsual punishment and therefore is illegal.

      Stop making shit up.

    18. Re:Capital Punishment? by jm007 · · Score: 1

      just to add an option, if we take those 80,000 confirmed calls and assume about 1 minute for each, we get about 2 months; seems like a fitting sentence on the hoe squad lol

    19. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also makes it virtually impossible for that person to ever hold a respectable or half-way decent job and virtually dooming him to a life of ostracism, poverty, and whatever crimes he can still commit. At the very least he is now dependent on government support for survival.

      Relieving the boredom of prison life with *anything* costs resources. Decent prisons are damned expensive. If you want drug treatment, educational programs, food, and competent guards, and especially if you want to pay for therapy and very, very expensive programs like transgender surgery, well, that money has to come from somewhere. i would *love* to see inmates who want transgender surgery pay for it with physical labor, it would reduce some of the glamor we're seeing for it these days.

    20. Re: Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maybe because he has a conscious and cares about other people. Maybe because he isn't a self centered douche bag who realizes there are other people on this earth. Maybe because his parents raised him properly and taught him how to respect all human life.

      I don't know, maybe just a few things. I didn't see any reverse racism. I just saw a person talking about the injustices that are committed daily against a certain group of people solely based upon their skin color.

      Racism is real. Don't try to water it down with your made up bullshit.

      Oh look a white man who stood up for a black man. They must be a reverse racist. LOL.

    21. Re:Capital Punishment? by Jon314 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What the hell is wrong with you? What glamor is there in getting gender reassignment surgery in prison? What glamor is there in being in prison?
      Gender reassignment is a medical issue, not a fashion choice.

        Anonymous Cowards should be forced to do physical labor as a punishment for the stupid stuff they say while hiding. It would take away some of the glamor in it.

    22. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Death by 1000 cuts seems an appropriate method

      There's no need to go *that* far.

      Start by locking him in a cell off on his own (solitary isn't specifically required but would certainly do)
      Then place an outdoor speaker so it broadcasts sound into the cell.
      Have it play a high volume phone ringer sound every 15 minutes around the clock.

      Just let nature and the rapid loss of sanity take its natural course.

    23. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wire him up to 1000 phone lines, filtered to receive only spam calls. He'll love that 90V 20Hz ringer current.

    24. Re:Capital Punishment? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You misspelled "mental" as "medical".

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    25. Re: Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How well does the reverse surgery work for overturned convictions?

    26. Re:Capital Punishment? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1, Informative
      Ammendment XIII, Section 1, reads as follows:

      Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. [emphasis added]

      Quite simply, you're wrong. In addition, hard labor is not cruel (unless you're a liberal), nor is it unusual.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    27. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read the 13th amendment more carefully. There's an exception made for penal labour in particular.

    28. Re:Capital Punishment? by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      if we take those 80,000 confirmed calls and assume about 1 minute for each, we get about 2 months

      The article says 96 million calls; that means 183 years. The agency indeed confirmed only 80000; ie 55 days. It's the equivalent of a battery after which you land in hospital for a few months; victims lost productive awake time while lifespan lost to murder also includes sleep and dementia (observing family members in their 80s-90s, I wouldn't be very sad to lose that time of my life).

      Thus, as you say, that hoe squad would be appropriate for what was proven. On the other hand, what was alleged (and within the current law the agency has no reason to bother proving more), I consider the crime to be as harmful as multiple murders, and that it should be punished appropriately.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    29. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      #2 - Well, he did it many thousands of times. How to you propose making the punishment equal to his crime?

      But, yeah. He took away lifespan. Anyone stealing from anyone does that.

    30. Re:Capital Punishment? by jcr · · Score: 1

      I would entirely approve of flogging the motherfucker to death.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    31. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also makes it virtually impossible for that person to ever hold a respectable or half-way decent job and virtually dooming him to a life of ostracism, poverty

      Having a criminal record has the same effect.

    32. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Mental issues are medical issues, jackass

    33. Re:Capital Punishment? by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 1

      I don't believe in capital punishment, not when there is something a LOT worse...Hoe Squad. In the south we have farm prisons and hoe squad, where they chunk your ass out in a field at the crack of dawn and work your ass like a dog until dusk....day after day after day.

      Doesn't this count as cruel (and unusual) punishment?

      --
      ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    34. Re:Capital Punishment? by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

      Give each victim one stone, allow them to throw it at him as penance. Of course this is set up to happen all at once in a town square. You're right, this sounds familiar.

    35. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So multiple murders were alleged but all that was proven was 55 days of kidnapping. I think we have to sentence based on what was proven; for that which was not proven we must not assume guilt.

    36. Re: Capital Punishment? by jd · · Score: 1

      Efficiency isn't guilt, it's intelligent. Racism and bigotry are inefficient and stupid.

      (Ok, to be fair, most racism is due to brain abnormalities leading to subnormal intelligence, it's not their fault.)

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    37. Re: Capital Punishment? by jd · · Score: 1

      This proves that in the new C standard, assert() should take two parameters. One for the assertion, one for the justification. (Ok, we call it the postcondition, but who's judging?)

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    38. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It still falls under cruel and unusual, therefore illegal.

    39. Re:Capital Punishment? by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      So multiple murders were alleged but all that was proven was 55 days of kidnapping. I think we have to sentence based on what was proven; for that which was not proven we must not assume guilt.

      The penalty in this case wouldn't be meaningfully different, thus bothering to prove anything more would be a waste of taxpayers' money. The law doesn't allow for a prison sentence, merely a fine -- and $120M is enough to bankrupt the culprit into the ground.

      Camel Pilot and me argue that it would be reasonable to consider this crime to be on par with multiple murders (as the harm to society is comparable, merely split between many people), but that would require changing the law, and lex retro non agit.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    40. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also makes it virtually impossible for that person to ever hold a respectable or half-way decent job and virtually dooming him to a life of ostracism, poverty, and whatever crimes he can still commit. At the very least he is now dependent on government support for survival.

      Kind of like a conviction already does, huh? Actually I think a one-handed man has a better chance of getting a respectable decent job than an ex-con.

    41. Re:Capital Punishment? by quonset · · Score: 1

      Also makes it virtually impossible for that person to ever hold a respectable or half-way decent job and virtually dooming him to a life of ostracism, poverty, and whatever crimes he can still commit.

      Then perhaps they shouldn't have been a criminal and this wouldn't be an issue.

    42. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget the hand-chopping: they could do that gonad-reassignment surgery to *everybody*. "Keep the hands, lose the nuts."

      How's that for a deterrent?

    43. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

      No, keep him incarcerated in a prison cell with a phone that receives a call every ten minutes.

    44. Re: Capital Punishment? by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Democrat partisans sure do love the Gulag.

    45. Re:Capital Punishment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what else works really well? In Saudi Arabia, they will chop of the hand of people convicted of theft. It's more than just a deterrent, it actually makes it much more difficult to steal again. Impossible, in fact, if you get caught twice. Fuck yeah.

      Oh, how I hope you get arrested, suspected of theft, in Saudi Arabia, trialed, judged and sentenced to the punishment you like so much, after which your hand is chopped off. Just like that.

      Of course, you didn't actually do it. A fact which is discovered a couple of months later, at which point you get a pat on the shoulder and a "Sorry about that, son."

      Of course, your hand remains chopped off.

      Yeah, I'd like to see that happen to you and *then* listen to what you have to say.

      Fucking moron, that's what you are.

  2. Advertising... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ok, I want them to go after the idiots that are doing the phone IRS or Treasury calls where the robot caller says a warrant is issued for your arrest, or you are being sued, etc. and is phishing for PII or getting a payment

    THOSE calls are dangerous for people

  3. LOCK HIM UP !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hard time and nothing less than 10 years without chance of parole.
    CAST YOUR VOTE, HERE.

  4. Re:Die Scum by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

    Why do I have to deal with bigot scum like you on a regular basis.

    --
    Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
  5. Butt hurt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with the truth

  6. Re: Die Scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a valid question.

  7. Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Dickering over what this man did or how he should be punished is silly.

    The real question is this: How can we design a system where, continuously, profitability is [nearly] only possible by playing according to well established rules?

    Concretely, why aren't unknown phone callers required to submit Hashcash solutions, so as to render it resource-intensive to spam people? Why isn't there an audio CAPTCHA system, where the caller has to answer a question?

    Come on!

    This is the age of digital communication. It's time to update the communications protocols; if our solution is political rather than technical (e.g., we rely on reactionary regulatory agencies or Congressional "inquiries"), then we're fucked by definition. We can do better.

    1. Re:Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      >The real question is this: How can we design a system where, continuously, profitability is [nearly] only possible by playing according to well established rules?

      Charge a small amount, e.g. $0.50 per call.

      Problem solved.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    2. Re:Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system. by EndlessNameless · · Score: 2

      This is the age of digital communication. It's time to update the communications protocols; if our solution is political rather than technical (e.g., we rely on reactionary regulatory agencies or Congressional "inquiries"), then we're fucked by definition. We can do better.

      Upgrading the PTSN switches to support authentication or CAPTCHAs will be very expensive.

      And you pretty much have to do them all, otherwise callers from a switch without authentication support won't be able to reach people on the new hardware.

      So you're faced with a classic externality. The phone companies are the only ones who can fix the problem, but they aren't really being affected by it. They see no reason to spend the money. Traditionally, these issues have been addressed by regulation.

      This is why America needs a functional federal government without partisan identity politics. Stop the constant screaming about liberals or privilege (whichever side you're on), and only support politicians who will work across the aisle to fix problems that affect everyone.

      The fundamentally insecure and broken POTS/cellular infrastructure is one of those things. It shouldn't matter whether you're a D or R---the protocols are so outdated that there is no justification for using them anymore except rampant greed.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    3. Re:Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      If a telephone company proposed a solution, do you think any Public Utilities Commission would allow the rate increase needed to pay for it?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    4. Re: Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system. by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Of course not. But the PUC would surely approve any rate increase needed to pay for the telecom CEO's new yacht. Priorities...

  8. Florida Man by Moof123 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What can't he do?!

    1. Re:Florida Man by GrumpySteen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What can't he do?!

      Exercise good judgement.

    2. Re:Florida Man by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 5, Funny

      What can't he do?!

      Beat Triangle Man.

    3. Re:Florida Man by skids · · Score: 1

      Yeah! ...Robocalls my ass. That was just his super speed. And a case of JD.

  9. What "intent to harm or defraud"? by mi · · Score: 1

    A complaint filed by the FCC against Abramovich in June 2017 alleged he had broken the Truth in Caller ID Act -- which prohibits callers from falsifying caller ID information to disguise their identity with intent to harm or defraud

    I doubt, this will hold up in court. The victims were neither harmed (unless every robocall is harmful), nor defrauded (they got to talk to vacation salespeople selling legitimate vacation-packages)...

    Sadly, the First Amendment keeps spammers (of all kinds) protected from most measures that could be taken against them...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

      Sadly, the First Amendment keeps spammers (of all kinds) protected from most measures that could be taken against them.

      The first amendment keeps the government from preventing speech before the fact.

      It does NOT keep the government from, after the act, penalizing a crime, of which fraudulent speech was a central element, in which harm was deliberately (and improperly) caused.

      Truth is an absolute defence. Fraud? Nope.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    2. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by Snotnose · · Score: 1

      The victims were neither harmed (unless every robocall is harmful),

      I don't answer numbers I don't recognize due to these assholes. If a friend or family member has an emergency and calls me on a borrowed phone, which I don't pickup as I don't recognize the number, then you damned well better believe I've been harmed.

      Fuck this guy. IMHO a lifetime in prison is too good for him. Make an example out of him. Then extradite a couple of the fuckers from other countries and do the same to them.

    3. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by mi · · Score: 1

      penalizing a crime, of which fraudulent speech was a central element

      While I agree, that fraud is not protected by the First Amendment, our hatred with spam in general — and with this guy in particular — is not based on content. Even if we were to stipulate, for the sake of argument, that this guy's calls were fraudulent — and he is disputing it — that'd be irrelevant to my observation anyway.

      Because you and I would be just as irritated, if we kept getting calls politely reminding us, that 2x2=4...

      How to make such behavior illegal in a country with the First Amendment, I do not know...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    4. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by mi · · Score: 1

      I hate him too. But I do not see, what law he broke. And we are a country ruled by laws, not men. We can't lock him up just because we hate him...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    5. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Re-read what you quoted. It doesn't say 'causing harm or defrauding', it says 'with INTENT to harm or defraud'. And nowhere does it say that they 'got to talk to vacation salespeople ...'. It says they talked to people CLAIMING to be legitmate companies, but were in fact fake. In other words, fraud.

    6. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by bws111 · · Score: 2

      You don't see what law he broke? You quoted it directly in your original post. He broke the 'Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009', which prohibits doing what he did - spoofing caller ID 'with intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value'.

    7. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Our hatred of spam may not be based on content, but the law and the prosecution of this guy is ENTIRELY about content. He is not charged with 'irritating people', he is charged with spoofing caller ID to defraud.

    8. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by mi · · Score: 1

      he is charged with spoofing caller ID to defraud.

      I addressed this point first, by asking, how could his calls be possibly interpreted as fraudulent. They can not be — he'll win in court.

      After I addressed this point, I made a different observation:

      Sadly, the First Amendment keeps spammers (of all kinds) protected from most measures that could be taken against them...

      This was about spammers in general — including ones, whose claims are squeaky clean. We hate them with passion, but can not make their practices illegal...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    9. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      How can they possibly interpreted as fraudulent? He claimed he was selling discounted vacation packages from real companies like Expedia and TripAdvisor when that was not true. That is fraudulent. In fact, it was TripAdvisor who tipped off the FCC as to what he was doing.

    10. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by mi · · Score: 1

      It says they talked to people CLAIMING to be legitmate companies, but were in fact fake. In other words, fraud.

      Your passionate hatred dims your wits. TFA makes no such allegations. Indeed, it does not cite the actual text of his messages at all — but if you have some other source, I'd be most interested in reading the actual verbiage of the recordings.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    11. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by bws111 · · Score: 2

      From http://www.miamiherald.com/new...

      Abramovich's scheme involved calling unsuspecting customers with a prerecorded message instructing them to “Press 1” to hear more about an “exclusive” vacation deal offered by a well-known travel or hospitality company, like TripAdvisor, Expedia, Marriott, or Hilton, the FCC said.

      They would then be transferred to a call center, where live operators would attempt to sell them one or more “discounted” vacation packages, like timeshares.

      But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

    12. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Also, TFA DOES indeed make such allegations.

      Consumers also were subject to fake robocalls offering "discounted" travel services by real companies including Expedia and TripAdvisor.

      Emphasis mine

    13. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by mi · · Score: 1

      That article does not cite the words in the recording either. Take a deep breath, get what wits you've got back together, and try to substantiate your accusation.

      to “Press 1” to hear more about an “exclusive” vacation deal offered by a well-known travel or hospitality company, like TripAdvisor, Expedia, Marriott, or Hilton, the FCC said.

      They would then be transferred to a call center, where live operators would attempt to sell them one or more “discounted” vacation packages, like timeshares.

      But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

      Not one word in that paraphrase is fraudulent... The call-centers, likely, did have some deals to sell from some of those companies. As well as many others. Were they "discounted"? Likely, they were — compared to some nebulous "list price" — as everything else is, in most stores you walk in to.

      No fraud... Unless FCC bankrupts him with the legal fees — an abuse of process we all should denounce regardless of its target — he'll win in court.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    14. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Do you have reading problems? Here, I'll make it easier for you: But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

      So no, the call centers DID NOT 'likely have deals from those companies'. And since they were not affiliated with the companies, they COULD NOT be selling 'discounted' packages from those companies.

      Except for 'press 1', EVERYTHING in the message was fraud.

    15. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by suutar · · Score: 1

      I'm not certain of the exact content of his robocalls but it _sounds_ like he was presenting himself as an agent of a company that he was not actually affiliated with, and since I assume that in some way he's getting money out of this, that's a lie to get money. Which is, as far as I'm aware, pretty much the definition of fraud, no?

    16. Re: What "intent to harm or defraud"? by jd · · Score: 1

      SCOTUS has ruled many times that commercial speech doesn't get full 1A protection. This is commercial speech. Problem solved.

      For more problem solving, please call this number...

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    17. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by mi · · Score: 1

      But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

      If you ever come to read the actual wording of the calls, I'm sure, you'll see for yourself, that they never claimed to actually be so affiliated.

      For example, consider: "Are you interested in purchasing a vacation from a reputable company like Expedia at a special low price? If yes, press #1 now!" It suggests, the asker is offering something from Expedia, but, in fact, he is talking only about a "company like Expedia"...

      since they were not affiliated with the companies, they COULD NOT be selling 'discounted' packages from those companies

      Neah, that's not a proof either. I can sell you a Sony TV without being affiliated with Sony.

      Anyway, let's wait, how it plays out in court... Or, at least, until the actual words used by the recordings are published by someone.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    18. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      That's and additional ding against him.

      But the particular fraud he was charged with is falsifying the caller I.D.

      This fraud would get some people to answer when they otherwise would not, wasting their time on the call they otherwise wouldn't have accepted. Damage.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    19. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt, this will hold up in court. The victims were neither harmed (unless every robocall is harmful), nor defrauded (they got to talk to vacation salespeople selling legitimate vacation-packages)...

      Any unsolicited robocall - excepting emergency messages - can be considered to be violating fundamental rights "retained by the people" under the 9th Amendment and "reserved to the people" under the 10th Amendment.

      All advertising, offers, sales (including the sale of a political candidate or a religion) should be opt-in.

      It takes time to deal with these calls. This is true even if one does not pick up. They have to be manually cleared from missed call logs. The empty voice mail messages still have to be manually deleted for the indicator that says "you have voice mail" on your phone to go away. It is an annoyance and a hassle, and an intrusion onto somebody else life, violating their rights. Thus, people are in fact harmed by these calls.

      Robocalls can be viewed as a form short-duration kidnapping: the operators of these systems are stealing a portion of somebody else's life for gain.

    20. Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just your unrequested notification that 2+2 does indeed equal 4.

  10. Spoofed numbers by Solandri · · Score: 1

    made almost 100 million spoofed robocalls over a three-month period

    Phone numbers are spoofable so a company with a pool of phone lines (e.g. a customer service center) can make phone calls using any of those lines, and all those calls will show up as being from their single public-facing number on Caller ID.

    If we're not going to update the phone system so this spoofed phone number is generated by the phone company instead of by the caller, then let's at least make it a crime to spoof the number to one that isn't yours.

    1. Re:Spoofed numbers by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Uh, that is a crime. In fact, it is the crime he is charged with.

  11. Headlines that start "Florida Man" are awesome. by slacktide · · Score: 3, Informative

    They even have a twitter feed for it! https://twitter.com/_floridama...

  12. DEATH PENALTY! by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh good, he owes money he doesn't have and thus doesn't have to pay. So what? Give him life in prison or the death penalty and see if anyone still wants to make robocalls?

  13. What's with the phone system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the problem with our phone networks, such that all these robocalls can happen in the first place?

    It should be trivially easy for Verizon/AT&T/etc to track down the originators and put a quick stop to it.

    1. Re:What's with the phone system by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      How, when the phone system lets you pretend to be any number you choose?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:What's with the phone system by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      When you make a call, if you don't own the number you're pretending to be, your phone company should not allow the phone call to go through. Done.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    3. Re:What's with the phone system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This solution makes sense and is straightforward, therefore it will not be implemented.

    4. Re:What's with the phone system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In order to connect the call the phone company (collectively) *has* to know both ends. But instead of displaying that information they allow the provision of arbitrary 'callerid' -- its the telephonic equivalent of a web browser's useragent string.

      However, displaying whatever routing identifier is being used isn't very helpful -- the 'name' for the other end is what is needed. While they have that information, given call volumes it isn't exactly realistic to use a database lookup to provide it. Put another way, it would cost a significant amount of money to implement a system to provide the actual information to the receiver.

      And it gets worse: what do you do about VOIP? The edge cases where there simply isn't meaningful information to display are not that numerous, but malicious users would take advantage of them.

    5. Re:What's with the phone system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trivial solution:

      Lets call the telephone making the phonecall Phone A.
      The phone receiving the call is Phone B.

      That would make the Telco of Phone A be Telco A, and similarly Telco B.

      Phone A places an outgoing call to Phone B.

      Telco A's equipment nearest in line to Phone A on the route between Phone A and Phone B looks up the caller ID information for Phone A from the official database of caller ID shit for Telco A. That information is then signed with Telco A's private Caller ID key, and sent to Telco B along with the call setup information. Telco B receives the call, routes it to Phone B. Phone B's closest Telco B equipment verifies that the Caller ID information is correctly signed with Telco A's private Caller ID key, using Telco A's well-known public Caller ID key. If the signature is correct, the call proceeds as normal. If the signature is not correct, the call is dropped and Phone B never rings.

      Damn, we just solved spam phone calls in 3 paragraphs.

    6. Re:What's with the phone system by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      While they have that information, given call volumes it isn't exactly realistic to use a database lookup to provide it.

      And that's why DNS cannot possibly work with today's volume of lookups.

      what do you do about VOIP?

      The VOIP company should provide the same lookup information to the phone company they connect to.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    7. Re:What's with the phone system by mishehu · · Score: 1

      Ah, another one of these. Sadly you have no idea what you're breaking or how things work on the PSTN or what legitimate services you would be breaking by this statement. And furthermore, there's limited options for caller identity verification out there for VoIP calls.

    8. Re:What's with the phone system by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      What would break that wasn't just a hack in the first place?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    9. Re:What's with the phone system by mishehu · · Score: 1

      You mistake "hack" with "this is how it is by design". Caller ID was never meant to be authoritative. That data is called ANI, and you often only get to see it when you have a toll free number (as you, the non-carrier, do get the right to know whose call you're agreeing to receive and pay for). And in the SIP world things get even more interesting with the From, the rpid, the PAI, and other headers, plus any isup that might be mapped over from the ss7 network and so on. I can think of about 1 or 2 possible services out there to authenticate those headers and cryptographically sign them, but that is dependent on a trust network basically. It isn't infallible either.

  14. Google Duplex Joke or comment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seriously, no one is going to nail the opportunity to relate any Joke or comment on Google Duplex, which is going to do something similar but "legally".

  15. 120 million for first call by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    OK, but where are the fines for all the other calls?

    I hear GITMO is nice this time of year.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  16. Interesting by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I get robocalls from spoofed caller IDs on a weekly basis. It's obvious that they are spoofing the caller ID, because the first 6 digits are exactly the same as my own number, and I don't know anybody whose phone number is close to mine! So... how do I go about getting the people that keep harassing me arrested and charged with violating the Truth in Caller ID Act? I can't ask for their real number to call them back on, because it's a recording -- it doesn't even give me a chance to request that they remove me from their list.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > first 6 digits are exactly the same as my own number

      Better than the ones I've been getting from (206) 946-3400 which is the local IRS office here in Seattle. The guy told me to send a check for over $1,000 and I was scared at first since I googled that number and found it was the IRS's number!

      That's been happening for a couple of years now, and Trump hasn't done a damn thing about that scam. I'm sure people have been fooled by it many times.

    2. Re:Interesting by Wargames · · Score: 1

      I get Transcription Beta "Agreed insurance plan at the price you can afford and we make it ___________________ ___________ we ________________ _________ in your area including CIGNA Blue Cross Edna United and many more press want to get a hassle free assessment or press two to be placed on our do not call list thanks for your time and be heathly and blessed..."

      A 20 second recording, and as many as 8 of these in a day. Listening to the message and pressing 2 does not seem to make them stop or increase in frequency. Recently I've been getting fewer and fewer.

      AT&T rep said nothing they can do about this.

      I guess SS7 and SMTP need sheriff's.

      --
      -- Each tock of the Planck clock is a new world and here we are still life. --
    3. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > first 6 digits are exactly the same as my own number

      Better than the ones I've been getting from (206) 946-3400 which is the local IRS office here in Seattle. The guy told me to send a check for over $1,000 and I was scared at first since I googled that number and found it was the IRS's number!

      That's been happening for a couple of years now, and Trump hasn't done a damn thing about that scam. I'm sure people have been fooled by it many times.

      Trump may not have done anything, but... Fake IRS chats with a bot as Jolly Roger floods his call center with more bots

    4. Re:Interesting by anegg · · Score: 1

      You fight back by registering a complaint with the FTC. Although you can't determine the actual number that they are calling from , you can register the circumstances of the call, which may eventually be used to bury the butthead. I suspect that those 80,000 verified scam calls could not have been verified without complaints detailing the call being filed.

      My favorites to report are the ones where the robocall leaves a voicemail that includes a callback number... sometimes the crims like to help themselves get caught.

    5. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to file complaints. I don't bother any more, for several reasons including: 1) the FTC isn't staffed or budgeted to do anything about it; and 2) even if the FTC was interested and funded to do something, they can't because the source is offshore in 99% of current cases. Besides, to get even part of the info FTC needs to go after a caller, you have to go through with the call; I don't have time for that, with up to a dozen robocalls a day (most landline, but more happening on cell including direct-to-voicemail which should REALLY be illegal and blocked but isn't), and the probability that as soon as you start asking the FTC questions they'll hang up. So NoMoRobo...which seems to learn many of even the local-prefix spam callers quickly.

    6. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would he ? The guy behind that scam is probably one of Trump's business partner.

    7. Re:Interesting by anegg · · Score: 1

      Filing complaints is a pain in the neck, and an imperfect process - agreed. I don't do it all of the time, but I try to do it some of the time. I want to get back to when I could answer the phone with a reasonable level of confidence that it was someone I wanted to talk to, especially when the CallerID shows a local call... so if we all do a bit, it will add up.

    8. Re: Interesting by jd · · Score: 1

      The FTC takes backhanded. We know that, that's what led to net neutrality (Title 2) being revoked illegally.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    9. Re: Interesting by anegg · · Score: 1

      Are you perhaps confusing the FTC and the FCC? It is the Federal Trade Commission that is regulating robocalls, not the Federal Communications Commission.

    10. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are your first six digits?

    11. Re:Interesting by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      My digits place me in Gaston, Oregon... not exactly a hotbed of call centers! (Also not exactly where I lived when I got the number 20 years ago, but close.)

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  17. There are 100 more just like him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These people don't care about the law or the threat of getting caught. The ONLY thing they care about is their own pocketbook. If every single robocall resulted in connecting to a real person he had to pay to try and convince you to buy something (to no avail), this would stop immediately. Even if you can only keep them on the phone for a couple of minutes, that costs them real money. Dial 1 every time you get a robocall. Pretend to be interested. Pretend to go look for your credit card while the guy waits on hold. Waste their time and money! If everyone did this just a couple times each day, NO ONE would even try to set up some kind of operation like this guy. It would be too expensive!

  18. A real punishment by yorgasor · · Score: 5, Funny

    I say, make the time fit the crime. Send him to jail. His cell has a single phone that can ring at any time, including the night. It does so, quite frequently. Each call is a recording with some bogus sales pitch. At some time during the sales pitch, which could last up to 5 minutes, a 5 digit code may or may not be given. This code can then be entered into an interface on the wall, which will deliver a food pellet. This is his only way to eat (although he can get water). He may get time in the yard, but if he misses an important call, he might miss his food.

    --
    Looking for a computer support specialist for your small business? Check out
    1. Re:A real punishment by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I was thinking something similar but with a negative feedback. Hook up a single phone on his wall. Have it hooked up to wires that run across this cell floor (as well as bed, toilet, and any other surface he might try to climb on). Anytime the phone rings, it delivers a mild electric shock to him if he doesn't answer it in 5 seconds. Not enough to permanently harm/kill him, but enough to cause him pain. Then, you publish his number. "Anyone who has received a robocall, call 555-555-5555 to shock a robo-caller!"

      Extra irony points if you have a robo-caller call this guy constantly.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:A real punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this would violate the Eighth Amendment.

    3. Re:A real punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dante? Is that you?

    4. Re:A real punishment by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      That would depend on the interpretation of the 8th Amendment. To be prohibited, must a punishment be both cruel and unusual? Or is either enough to trigger a prohibition? The punishment would certainly be unusual, but I wouldn't call it cruel when compared to other punishments already allowed.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  19. And yet I still get 4-5 calls a week.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because the majority of the robocallers now use computer systems and work from India. The FCC is overwhelmed but they won't correct the problem at the source - by going after the telecoms to NOT send the calls through if they can't verify their location. Period. Spoofing numbers should be impossible, and yet we hear about the technological challenges of fixing it. But if were costing the telecoms money it would be fixed in months, if not weeks. This is how the FCC keeps the telecoms happy AND creates a continued reason for their enforcement arm to exist. Win/Win for them - Lose/Lose for us.

  20. Re: Die Scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it though? How come most serial killers and rapist are white people? That's a valid question as their is a lot of poof and stats to back it up.

    Whereas asking why are all Jews scammers makes no sense at all if we look at the scope of things. First off, was this guy even Jewish?

  21. Re: Die Scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There*

  22. I *just* got one of these calls today, dangit! by MobyDisk · · Score: 2

    I've gotten calls like this with phone numbers similar to local friends, but up until today it never was actually one of my friends. I answered, thinking it was my neighbor, and *bam* robocall. How can they possibly make any money off of this? Who doesn't recognize it as a robocall and hang-up immediately? And of that percentage, who actually buys stuff?

    1. Re:I *just* got one of these calls today, dangit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can they possibly make any money off of this?

      Same reason why people keep ruining their web sites with those annoying newsletter popups. Because there's always morons who do sign up.

    2. Re:I *just* got one of these calls today, dangit! by ToTheStars · · Score: 1

      How can they possibly make any money off of this? Who doesn't recognize it as a robocall and hang-up immediately? And of that percentage, who actually buys stuff?

      There is an art in these scams to being a little bit "obvious", so that anyone who's skeptical or sensible gets weeded out. Then, the people who make it to the end (when the human scammer gets involved, which is the part that is "expensive" for the scammer) are really gullible and ready to hand over a bunch of money.

  23. Jolly Roger Telephone Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I get robocalls, I let the Jolly Roger bots answer it for me.

  24. Robot calls? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF are those?
    From context, it sounds like pre-recorded ads played from a tape?
    But that makes no sense at all.

    Someone care to enlighten the rest of us?

  25. Why would you do that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Authentication or CAPTCHAs can be an entirely end-to-end, application-level protocol; the existing infrastructure just needs to pass the data around. An iPhone is more than capable of answering phone calls silently, asking the caller (with text-to-speech) to enter the number resulting from the sum of 2 and 3, and then only ringing the recipient when the caller answers properly (or hanging up on the caller).

    Politics is an inherently flawed means by which to solve technical problems; pointing guns at people and saying "Do this or else" is not a valid foundation for solving engineering problems. Even if you could get a "functional" government, it would only be transient; government is a worthless institution for progressing society, as shown by literally millennia of history.

  26. What will the money go towards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FCC gets $120,000,000. What will they do with it? They probably wont divvy it up between the people affected by the caller. Probably buy electric cars and not use them to say they are a green branch of government. Dumb.

  27. and?? by ohgary · · Score: 2

    So someone in 2016 did bad stuff and was fined more money than he could ever pay back. Issue still exist in 2018 and is easy to fix. FORCE telcom's to not route calls from numbers that dont provide valid caller ID.

  28. That's it? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I was kind of hoping for a YouTube live stream of him being drawn and quartered. Are we not at that stage of societal decadence yet?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:That's it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was kind of hoping for a YouTube live stream of him being drawn and quartered. Are we not at that stage of societal decadence yet?

      We are not yet at that stage of societal decadence. Check liveleak, but only if the guy posts bail.

    2. Re: That's it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vote Hillary in 2020 and maybe we'll get there...

  29. Re:Die Scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Easy to answer: Most scammers are not Jews. Another question: Why did your mother consume so many drugs while she was pregnant with you?

  30. % of net worth by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see this rule applied to banks, and other large corporations when they're caught violating the laws.

    Also: one down, how many gazillion of these bottom dwelling worms to go? I'm still getting 2 or 3 robocalls a day with faked caller ID on my cellphone.

  31. Florida Orange by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Maybe we should just block all phone calls coming from Mar-a-Lago and see if that fixes the problem.

    The calls...THEY'RE COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE!

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  32. He'll Never Pay A Dime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These kinds of things have happened before. The guy is certainly well-protected from any judgements, and if FCC tries to collect they'll get an empty bag.

    As for crime: violating FCC rules is, technically, a crime. Spoofing phone numbers, if it isn't a crime when done with intent to defraud, should be.

  33. Obligatory Simpsons by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2
    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  34. (((Adrian Abramovich))) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every. Single. Time.

  35. Don't know what you're complaining about by PuddleBoy · · Score: 1

    Based on the number of robo-calls I got on my cellphone *just today*, I figure about 10% of all robo-calls are coming to me. If there are a few others out there like me, then we account for half of those calls.

    Seriously, WTF? It's gotten to the point where those calls are disrupting my day. If it's my bank or someone important, I need to answer. I may have to change my number (that I've had for 15+ years).

    On a related rant, one of my coworkers eventually had to change her work phone number because a robo-call shop was using her number as their number on CallerID. Jeez - this is out of control.

    1. Re:Don't know what you're complaining about by Streetlight · · Score: 1

      As far as I know changing your number won't make any difference - you'll get just as many robocalls. I don't think you can hide from these callers. I likely get as many of these calls as anyone else. Considering all the calls every US telephone gets, if the FCC fined all the robo callers $1,500 per call, we might wipe out the national debt fairly quickly. That is, of course, if they could collect that money. My guess they're not going to collect much from Adrian Abramovich, the name mentioned in the original post.

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  36. Hook up the phone to the electricity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And give all of us his phone number. I'd happily pay for that call!

  37. Not much of a penalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what I am seeing is that as long as I can make $2 or more per illegal call, I can just share my earnings with the US govt?

  38. Re: Die Scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This message brought to you by the Anti-Defamation League. Send us more money today!

  39. Tortured by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want him tortured