If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   Man wins judgement against spammers for sending him spam   (wired.com) divider line 44
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

4247 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Dec 2001 at 9:39 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
fb-
2001-12-13 09:43:54 AM
I blame the people that buy stuff from spammers, not the spammers.
 
2001-12-13 09:43:59 AM
Wow $2,000 I wonder if VA has a law like this. I have about $200,000 worth of spam in my inbox.
 
2001-12-13 09:46:55 AM
If it wasn't for spam, I wouldn't get any mail at all.
 
2001-12-13 09:47:43 AM
As anyone who has won in small claims court can tell you, winning the case is only half the battle. Getting the judgement paid, particularly from an out-of-state defendant, is very difficult.
 
2001-12-13 09:48:13 AM
Yes! But fb- has a point, if people didn't buy their crap they'd find the Internet non-viable. I refuse to buy things from spammers, telemarketers, etc. If I want it, I'll go get it, thanks.
 
2001-12-13 09:51:21 AM
Anti-Spam legislation = Lawyers' Full Employment Act; especially when it comes to collecting judgments.
 
2001-12-13 09:53:59 AM
Hell, I'm gonna go get me some spammers! Colorado has an anti-spam law!
 
2001-12-13 09:55:32 AM
Spammers should be no different in the laws eyes as Telemarketers who don't put you on their "do not call" list

Show me the money !
 
2001-12-13 10:09:19 AM
In my experience, the best thing to do with spam is blocking the sender and removing it (Hotmail blocking function). Those spammers will never know if I ever read it and I won't get a second spam email from them.
 
2001-12-13 10:09:19 AM
Judgements? Hell, I have drawer full of judgements against deadbeats who didn't pay me. There not worth the paper there printed on.
 
2001-12-13 10:10:38 AM
er......there=they're.

I'm such a putz sometimes
 
2001-12-13 10:11:14 AM
BigKahuna,
I assume the interest counter is running on those?
 
2001-12-13 10:13:35 AM
Spam is one area where a very aggressive attorney making a career out of class action suits would be doing a public service. Some clever attorney out there ought to get on the ball with this idea.
 
2001-12-13 10:20:15 AM
Appie- Oh we keep track of what the interest might be but like I said collecting on a judgment is extremely difficult, especially if they're out of state. Unless the amount owed gets well into 5 figures its usually to costly to pursue. What we try to do is file a lien against a home or building that they own so that they can't sell it without satisifying the lien. Works most of the time.
 
2001-12-13 10:21:04 AM
Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam
 
2001-12-13 10:35:38 AM
Dangit! Arkansas doesn't have a anti-spam law. Looks like I need to write the state senate about this. Getting tired of getting spammed and not being able to get off the farking mailing list.

Wasn't there some guy not too long ago that sued telemarketers for an outrageous amount of money because they wouldn't take him off the calling list, and won?
 
TV
2001-12-13 10:49:15 AM
the worst is when you get spam that was meant for someone else. i don't know, it just makes me feel dirty. i don't want to have to touch someone else's spam.
 
2001-12-13 11:06:25 AM
Better E-mail spam than 3 million trees a year getting made into junk mail no-one reads. We should be able to take unsolicited mailers to court also. A 'no junk mail' sign on a door should be legally binding. If I want to know what offers are on locally i'll go to the store...
 
2001-12-13 11:20:15 AM
Meshman said;
Yes! But fb- has a point, if people didn't buy their crap they'd find the Internet non-viable. I refuse to buy things from spammers, telemarketers, etc. If I want it, I'll go get it, thanks.


Yeah, but you still get junk mail in your snail-mail box, don't you ??
Junk mail, whether electronic or paper, will probably never end.

[Insert something about terrorists winning here....]
 
2001-12-13 11:28:19 AM
I'm pink therefore I'm spam.

Fankervermush.

*runs*
 
2001-12-13 11:41:02 AM
that is sweet, down with the spammers!
 
2001-12-13 11:57:20 AM
I have spent the last 2 weeks unsubscribing to every spammer.. i'm down from 50 spams a day on my hotmail to about a dozen but i hate the "reply to this email business" cause the emails are faked. I want no spam. I've opted out of a company and they still send me spam 3 weeks later..

maybe they are terrorists
 
2001-12-13 12:01:45 PM
'Tubey, or not tubey? What the hell are those red chunks?'

- Spamlet.
 
2001-12-13 12:05:54 PM
Real remon: Imagine how much junk mail you'd be buried in if paper and postage were FREE? Even telemarketers have to pay long distance bills. The reason unsolicited commerical email is such a problem is because the spammers shamelessly exploit the unlimited email capabilities most ISPs provide. Since they can get their message out to millions of people for essentially nothing, even a 0.001% response rate gets them their money's worth.

So in summary, Fb- is a moron.
 
2001-12-13 12:12:36 PM
Zylon;

Point #1.
Understood.




Point # 2.
Agreed.
 
2001-12-13 12:26:55 PM
SteelBoots:I have spent the last 2 weeks unsubscribing to every spammer

That doesn't work with a crap. Usually all you do when you unsubscribe is prove to them your e-mail address is still valid, and on to another list you go.

Get another free account at hotmail or one of the other thousand web-mail services and use that whenever you're filling in forms on sites, posting on usenet, etc etc. Keep your "serious" e-mail address for friends and whatnot and threaten them will severe death if they ever enter you in a contest or anything using that address. Your free account can collect the spam and your reg. account will stay (hopefully) spam free.

(You can also try SpamCop if you really want to dig into where the mail is coming from and report it to the appropriate abuse box at the originating ISP.
 
2001-12-13 12:48:35 PM
I hate spam.
 
2001-12-13 12:51:13 PM
hairyscot -

Actually, I forget how to do it, but there is a way you can get junk mail stopped from your home's mailbox. You'll have to research it from the post office, but it can be done.
 
2001-12-13 12:56:58 PM
KramitTheFrog
Yes, actually there's a guy who essentially has made his living by suing telemarketers. My guess is he signs up for every contest, etc. in the world. When they call him to sell something, he gives the "take me off your list" request, and records when he did it. The telemarketers aren't allowed to call for 6 months or something, but his name likely gets on the list again from a new entry, and they call him. He sues, wins, does it again.

Wash, rinse, repeat.
 
2001-12-13 12:58:27 PM
Oops, didn't finish... If we enact legislation similar that applies to spam everywhere, we could just sit at home & Fark, and blast the spammers off the face of the earth by hitting them in their pocketbooks.
 
2001-12-13 01:18:40 PM
Time for me to change ISPs. I've had the same one since December of 1995, and in the past few weeks, I've noticed that I receive, on average, 220 SPAM emails each in a week. This is unfarkingacceptable!!!!!

-he who stacks pork
 
2001-12-13 02:16:29 PM
As much as I detest Spam, is it not a form of free speach. That is, as long as it is FREE to the recipiant.
 
2001-12-13 02:58:50 PM
 
2001-12-13 03:08:07 PM
Zylon, nice unbiased source there.

I dislike spam. But I am worried about setting the precedent where the government says "You cannot do this on the Internet". Plus, if the spammers just go off-shore, what's to stop them? There's one guy sending junk faxes from England, where there's no law to stop him.
 
2001-12-13 04:16:33 PM
GadgetDon, I roll my eyes in your general direction. Was there anything in the CAUCE FAQ which you found factually inaccurate? If not, then the source doesn't matter.

Spammers are weasely, freeloading leeches, and everyone knows it. Why else would they go to such huge lengths to make it difficult to backtrace their messages? They flagrantly ignore ISP no-spam Terms of Service. Spammers shed addresses and domain names so quickly it's almost impossible to filter them (and they like it this way).

The only reason spammers exist is because it's economically viable for them. The only way to get rid of them is to legislate financial consequences to their behavior. Until then, we rely on "vigilante" organizations like MAPS to keep spam to manageable levels.
 
2001-12-13 04:20:04 PM
Zylon, the article you reference suggests that SPAM is not free speech when it costs the recipient. SPAM costs me jack squat. The time it takes me to push delete is negligible even if you want to say time is money. Granted, I lose most a minute or two with ALL the spam I get in a week, but can I really prosecute a spammer for the fact that other people sent me messages too?
 
2001-12-13 04:24:00 PM
Zylon:Spammers are weasely, freeloading leeches, and everyone knows it.

You're absolutely right, but how is that illegal? Welfare recipiants in large part are "weasely, freeloading leeches,", and the government gives them my money.

 
2001-12-13 05:13:19 PM
Flignir: Spam costs you a lot more than jack squat.

http://www.cauce.org/about/faq.shtml#delete
 
2001-12-13 07:30:51 PM
Zylon, do you even read posts before replying to them? You can't hold spammers accountable for that fictitious $8B number becuase you can't sue someone for something somebody else did. If you cost me $.000001 but people like you cost me $100,000,000. I can't sue you for $100,000,000 or even $0.01. And no one FORCES ISP's to raise rates.
 
2001-12-13 07:42:51 PM
Did YOU even read that entire FAQ page? Because that question is answered right here.

I guess you have to have your information spoon-fed to you, eh? Or are you just shooting to become the next Fb-?
 
2001-12-13 07:59:48 PM
Actually, no, that only restates what I just said, but you conveniently the fact that ISP's can choose not to raise rates. Like I said, no one forces them, and you can't blame on spammer for damage allegedly caused by others.
 
2001-12-13 08:00:24 PM

Actually, no, that only restates what I just said, but you conveniently forget the fact that ISP's can choose not to raise rates. Like I said, no one forces them, and you can't blame on spammer for damage allegedly caused by others.

That's better.

 
2001-12-13 10:14:01 PM
Are you really this stupid? Yeah, ISPs can "choose" not to raise rates... eg, they can choose to go out of business because their bandwidth bill exceeds what they're charging their customers.

Don't you have a bridge you should be under somewhere?
 
2001-12-17 07:51:15 PM
No I don't want to hear about the new and improved X10 cam! No No No No No! I seem to get that ad at every site I go to, any one know how to shut it up?
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report