×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Class Action Lawsuit Against Spammer

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the eggs-bacon-and-50-dollars-please dept.

Spam 299

sfjoe writes "California-based spammer eTracks is being sued by the law firm, Morrison and Foerster (who have a very cool homepage). M & F's press release says they are "...seeking other relief, including attorneys' fees and statutorily authorized damages of $50 for each email delivered in violation of the law, up to $25,000 per day". California's anti-spam law has already held up under appeals court scrutiny so this may very well be a major setback to the spam industry." I think spammers should be forced to pay by donating an organ for each forged header.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

299 comments

Mofo. (5, Funny)

Bonker (243350) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170280)

These are either the coolest lawyers in the world or most clueless.

Re:Mofo. (-1, Flamebait)

OneFix (18661) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170406)

I'll go with clueless...

Because NetCraft says their site is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000 [netcraft.com] and it even detects a switch FROM Linux sometime in mid-late 2001.

Re:Mofo. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170501)

You must be a troll but everyone knows that windows 2000 has a far lower TCO for a single server than linux, think about it bonehead.

Re:Mofo. (1)

mossmann (25539) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170434)

MoFo is actually a fairly well known and respected [infirmation.com] law firm.

Re:Mofo. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170512)

funny how the stats about mofo's employees list that their are 6 openly gay employees there, like they know they got some closet cases too

Re:Mofo. (1)

Maserati (8679) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170520)

A friend of mine works there, I'll have to ask him how they stood up to a slashdotting.

Re:Mofo. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170454)

I'll go with coolest, they have the Working Mother Award. Think about it...

mofo.com?!? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170284)

That is just too funny. :)

MoFo (2, Funny)

unformed (225214) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170286)

How cool of a name is that?

Judge: And the defendent is MoFo and associates.

I'll have to hire them if I ever get caught ..... um, i mean, arrested.

Presenting for the prosecution... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170400)

It is lead attorney, Jo Moma!

I want their services! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170493)

Not their legal services. I just want a vanity e-mail address at their domain!

spam-this@mofo.com

Web Page (0, Offtopic)

Tri0de (182282) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170294)

That is one clean page web page design.

You know, this could be good, vigilante action for profit against spammers, I likes it!

Where's My Money, Mofo? (3, Insightful)

derrickh (157646) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170296)

Unfortunatley, odds are that as soon as they win the case, the spammer will disappear and resurface somewhere else, only to repeat the process.

D

We'll Get These Mofos! (1, Redundant)

andyf (15400) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170298)

Morrison & Foerster (MoFo, www.mofo.com [mofo.com]) said, "We're Gonna Get These Mofos! Err, not us, MoFo, but those Mofo Spammers..."

Yes, they really call themselves MoFo [mofo.com]!

First (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170300)

diospadre has first post...maybe

I want a lawyer with a homepage like that! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170306)

Pseudo phone call: Hi, this is Jay Williams, Oh Hi, my favourtite client... I've just had someone spam me... That mofo.. I'll get him! Wow, cool... .. such mofos... @$$#! ....

Major setback? (1)

writermike (57327) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170315)

this may very well be a major setback to the spam industry

Yeah. In California.

Sorry to be cynical, but these guys _can_ just move, y'know. *Sigh*

organ donation? Nah.... (0, Funny)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170318)

"I think spammers should be forced to pay by donating an organ for each forged header."

nah, make em donate a piano. Baby Grand or something...*rim shot*

Ok, it's stupid, but what can you say about this? Cool, I hope they win, spammers suck, do people actually buy into these spam emails? Why isn't it illegal in all states/countries, etc.?

The horse is almost dead, I hope. We've beat it enough.

Re:organ donation? Nah.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170402)

someone please mod this crap down

homepage (2, Funny)

selderrr (523988) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170320)

who have a very cool homepage).

Not anymore in say... 30 minutes ?

Mr. Turd, this is MoFo.Prepare for some heavy slashdotting

standing up well (2)

Archfeld (6757) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170474)

there site is still up and serving pages with decent speed, either is a really slow day on slashdot or the MOFO's have a decent sysadmin/setup

Duplicate Story (1, Offtopic)

avalys (221114) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170330)

Why has this been happening so much of late? You'd think the slashdot editors would actually read slashdot.

Spamming... a *law firm* ? (5, Funny)

Stonehand (71085) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170333)

It looks like Morrison and Foerster is suing on its own behalf rather than some other party, and that the spammer had continued to spam even after being warned.

Oops. So when can we expect a) spammers filtering to avoid spamming law firms, and b) law firms offering e-mail aliasing to avoid the spammers? :)

$50/e-mail! (2, Funny)

Yoda2 (522522) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170334)

I could retire at $50/spam message!

The big problem is how can we get at all of the garbage that originates overseas? Half of my spam comes from ".tw"

While it would be nice to get rid of spam, I will miss the daily opportunity to have my penis enlarged.

Re:$50/e-mail! (1)

phyxeld (558628) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170469)

from the looks the the regular expression syntax on their site [etracks.com], I'd say it's a fair bet these spammers are using open source (perl) for their dirty work. And I bet they aren't even "doing the right thing" and releasing their scripts under the GPL!

go get em, mofo!

Do you think that I can sue them... (5, Funny)

pinkpineapple (173261) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170337)

...and win my case? I receive about 3 ads for penis enlargement a day even if I am from the opposite sex.

PPA, the girl next door.

Re:Do you think that I can sue them... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170435)

That's well targeted mail. Who would benefit from a ... more self secure male friend? Right.

Stupid joke (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170339)

I think spammers should be forced to pay by donating an organ for each forged header.

Personally, I would prefer if they donated pianos.

A death blow against Free Speech (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170340)

Congratulations to all of you lazy assholes who could not be bothered to just hit the delete button a couple of times per day. Your laziness has resulted in the curtailing of free speech in this country (up until now it had been a constitutional right.) I wonder, in a year's time when lawmakers use this law as a stepping-stone for other speech-limiting laws (i.e., "you cannot discuss Linux or other OSS software in e-mail") will you bastards be so damn smug?

Re:A death blow against Free Speech (2, Insightful)

sqlrob (173498) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170363)

Since when is commerical speech protected to the degree that individual speech is?

There is a right to free speech. There is not a right to force that speech on others.

Re:A death blow against Free Speech (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170393)

Since when is spam forced on you? Nobody forced you to get internet access or an e-mail accounts, and nobody forces you to read spam either. You can look at the headers and delete the message without reading the body. You can even write a program to delete mail automatically that doesn't come from a known address. There are lots of ways to deal with spam without nullifying the First Amendment which is what you lot have done.

Re:A death blow against Free Speech (4, Informative)

sqlrob (173498) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170475)

Did you read the press release?

"Even after receiving formal notice of Morrison & Foerster's policy against spam, Etracks has sent at least 6,500 unsolicited email advertisements to Morrison & Foerster's California users."

So, my mail server I pay by the byte. Why should I pay for any spam, even the headers? If I'm forced to stop because of that, aren't they inhibiting my First Amendment rights?

Read the law. The mail:

Must be labeled advertisement

Must have valid contact information

Must not have forged headers

Must cease mailing upon request How is any of that against the First Amendment?

Re:A death blow against Free Speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170370)

Speech isn't "free" when I have to pay to hear it, assmunch.

Re:A death blow against Free Speech (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170414)

You're not paying anything to read spam. Are you saying that if there were no spammers that your internet access would be free? What is wrong with you?

Who the hell modded this troll as "insightful"?!?! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170386)

Who the hell modded this troll up?!?!

spam != free speech.

spam == harrassment

just to make sure the spambots pick these up.... (4, Funny)

edrugtrader (442064) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170341)

sales@etracks.com
staffhelp@etracks.com
busdev@etracks.com
email_removal@response.etrac ks.com
isp@etracks.com

and all the politicians who don't help (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170433)

Sen. Jeff Sessions senator@sessions.senate.gov Sen. Richard Shelby senator@shelby.senate.gov Rep. Spencer Bachus sbachus@hr.house.gov Rep. Sonny Callahan callahan@hr.house.gov Rep. Bud Cramer budmail@hr.house.gov Rep. Terry Everett everett@hr.house.gov Alaska Sen Ted Stevens senator_stevens@stevens.senate.gov Sen. Frank Murkowski email@murkowski.senate.gov Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl info@kyl.senate.gov Sen. John McCain senator_mccain@mccain.senate.gov Rep. J. D. Hayworth hayworth@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Kolbe jimkolbe@hr.house.gov Rep. Ed Pastor edpastor@hr.house.gov Arkansas Sen. Dale Bumpers senator@bumpers.senate.gov Sen. Tim Hutchinson senator hutchinson@hutchinson.senate.gov Rep. Jay Dickey jdickey@hr.house.gov Rep. Tim Hutchinson timhutch@hr.house.gov California Sen. Barbara Boxer senator@boxer.senate.gov Sen. Dianne Feinstein senator@feinstein.senate.gov Rep. Brian Bilbray bilbray@hr.house.gov Rep. George Brown talk2geb@hr.house.gov Rep. Tom Campbell campbell@hr.house.gov Rep. Chris Cox chriscox@hr.house.gov Rep. David Dreier cyberrep@hr.house.gov Rep. Anna Eshoo annagram@hr.house.gov Rep. Sam Farr samfarr@hr.house.gov Rep. Vic Fazio dcaucus@hr.house.gov Rep. Jane Harman jharman@hr.house.gov Rep. Tom Lantos talk2tom@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerry Lewis khuiskes@hr.house.gov Rep. Zoe Lofgren zoegram@hr.house.gov Rep. Howard McKeon tellbuck@hr.house.gov Rep. George Miller gmiller@hr.house.gov Rep. Ron Packard rpackard@hr.house.gov Rep. Nancy Pelosi sfnancy@hr.house.gov Rep. George Radanovich george@hr.house.gov Rep. Frank Riggs repriggs@hr.house.gov Rep. Fortney 'Pete' Stark petemail@hr.house.gov Rep. Lynn C. Woolsey woolsey@hr.house.gov Colorado Sen. Wayne Allard Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell data@nighthorse.falcontech.com Rep. Dan Schaefer schaefer@hr.house.gov Rep. David Skaggs skaggs@hr.house.gov Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd. sen_dodd@dodd.senate.gov Sen. Joseph Lieberman. senator_lieberman@lieberman.senate.gov Rep. Sam Gejdenson bozrah@hr.house.gov Rep. Christopher Shays cshays@hr.house.gov Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden senator@biden.senate.gov Sen. William Roth Rep. Michael Castle delaware@hr.house.gov Florida Sen. Bob Graham bob_graham@graham.senate.gov Sen. Connie Mack senator_mack@jec.senate.gov Rep. Michael Bilirakis truerep@hr.house.gov Rep. Charles Canady canady@hr.house.gov Rep. Peter Deutsch pdeutsch@hr.house.gov Rep. Alcee Hastings hastings@hr.house.gov Rep. John Mica mica@hr.house.gov Rep. Dan Miller miller13@hr.house.gov Rep. Cliff Stearns cstearns@hr.house.gov Rep. Karen Thurman kthurman@hr.house.gov Rep. Dave Weldon fla-15@hr.house.gov Georgia Sen. Max Cleland senator_max_cleland@cleland.senate.gov Sen. Paul Coverdell senator_coverdell@coverdell.senate.gov Rep. Saxby Chambliss saxby@hr.house.gov Rep. Mac Collins rep3mac@hr.house.gov Rep. Newt Gingrich georgia6@hr.house.gov Rep. John Linder jlinder@hr.house.gov Rep. Charlie Norwood ga10@hr.house.gov Hawaii Sen. Daniel Akaka Sen. Daniel Inouye senator@inouye.senate.gov Rep. Neil Abercrombie neil@abercrombie.house.gov Idaho Sen. Larry Craig larry_craig@craig.senate.gov Sen. Dirk Kempthorne dirk_kempthorne@kempthorne.senate.gov Rep. Helen Chenoweth askhelen@hr.house.gov Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun senator@moseley-braun.senate.gov Rep. Jerry Costello jfcil12@hr.house.gov Rep. Harris Fawell hfawell@hr.house.gov Rep. Luis Gutierrez luisg@hr.house.gov Rep. Dennis Hastert dhastert@hr.house.gov Rep. Ray LaHood lahood18@hr.house.gov Rep. Bobby Rush brush@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerry Weller jweller@hr.house.gov Indiana Sen. Dan Coats Sen. Richard Lugar lugar@iquest.net Rep. Lee Hamilton hamilton@hr.house.gov Rep. John Hostettler johnhost@hr.house.gov Rep. David McIntosh mcintosh@hr.house.gov Rep. Tim Roemer troemer@hr.house.gov Rep. Mark Souder souder@hr.house.gov Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley chuck_grassley@grassley.senate.gov Sen. Tom Harkin tom_harkin@harkin.senate.gov Rep. Jim Nussle nussleia@hr.house.gov Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback sam_brownback@brownback.senate.gov Sen. Pat Roberts Rep. Todd Tiahrt tiahrt@hr.house.gov Kentucky Sen. Wendell Ford wendell_ford@ford.senate.gov Sen. Mitch McConnell senator@mcconnell.senate.gov Rep. Jim Bunning bunning4@hr.house.gov Louisiana Sen. John Breaux senator@breaux.senate.gov Sen. Mary Landrieu senator@landrieu.senate.gov Rep. Jim McCrery mccrery@hr.house.gov Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe olympia@snowe.senate.gov Sen. Susan Collins senator@collins.senate.gov Rep. John Baldacci baldacci@hr.house.gov Maryland Sen. Barbara Mikulski. senator@mikulski.senate.gov Sen. Paul Sarbanes senator@sarbanes.senate.gov Rep. Ben Cardin cardin@hr.house.gov Rep. Robert Ehrlich, Jr. ehrlich@hr.house.gov Rep. Albert Wynn alwynn@hr.house.gov Massachusetts Sen Edward Kennedy senator@kennedy.senate.gov Sen. John Kerry john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov Rep. Martin Meehan mtmeehan@hr.house.gov Rep. Joe Moakley jmoakley@hr.house.gov Rep. John Olver olver@hr.house.gov Michigan Sen. Spencer Abraham michigan@abraham.senate.gov Sen. Carl Levin senator@levin.senate.gov Rep. Dave Camp davecamp@hr.house.gov Rep. John Conyers, Jr. jconyers@hr.house.gov Rep. Vernon Ehlers congehlr@hr.house.gov Rep. Peter Hoekstra tellhoek@hr.house.gov Rep. Lynn Rivers lrivers@hr.house.gov Rep. Nick Smith repsmith@hr.house.gov Rep. Bart Stupak stupak@hr.house.gov Rep. Fred Upton talk2fsu@hr.house.gov Minnesota Sen. Rod Grams mail_grams@grams.senate.gov Sen. Paul Wellstone senator@wellstone.senate.gov Rep. Gil Gutknecht gil@hr.house.gov Rep. Bill Luther tellbill@hr.house.gov Rep. David Minge dminge@hr.house.gov Rep. James Oberstar oberstar@hr.house.gov Rep. Collin Peterson tocollin@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Ramstad mn03@hr.house.gov Rep. Martin Sabo msabo@hr.house.gov Rep. Bruce Vento vento@hr.house.gov Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran senator@cochran.senate.gov Sen. Trent Lott sentorlott@lott.senate.gov Rep. Bennie Thompson ms2nd@hr.house.gov Rep. Roger Wicker rwicker@hr.hosue.gov Missouri Sen. John Ashcroft john_ashcroft@ashcroft.senate.gov Sen. Christopher Bond kit_bond@bond.senate.gov Rep. Jo Ann Emerson jemerson@hr.house.gov Rep. Richard Gephardt demldr@hr.house.gov Rep. James Talent talentmo@hr.house.gov Montana Sen. Max Baucus max@baucus.senate.gov Sen Conrad Burns conrad_burns@burns.senate.gov Nebraska Sen. Charles Hagel chuck_hagel@hagel.senate.gov Sen. Bob Kerrey bob@kerrey.senate.gov Rep. Jon Cristensen talk2jon@hr.house.gov Nevada Sen. Harry Reid senator_reid@reid.senate.gov Sen. Richard Bryan senator@bryan.senate.gov Rep. John Ensign ensign@hr.house.gov New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg mailbox@gregg.senate.gov Sen. Bob Smith opinion@smith.senate.gov Rep. Charles Bass cbass@hr.house.gov New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg frank_lautenberg@lautenberg.senate.gov Sen. Robert Toricelli senator_torricelli@torricelli.senate.gov Rep. Robert Andrews randrews@hr.house.gov Rep. Bob Franks franksnj@hr.house.gov Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen njeleven@hr.house.gov New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman senator_bingaman@bingaman.senate.gov Sen. Pete Domenici senator_domenici@domenici.senate.gov New York Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan senator@dpm.senate.gov Sen. Alfonse D'Amato senator_al@damato.senate.gov Rep. Sherwood Boehlert boehlert@hr.house.gov Rep. Eliot Engel engeline@hr.house.gov Rep. Michael Forbes mpforbes@hr.house.gov Rep. Maurice Hinchey hinchey@hr.house.gov Rep. Sue Kelly dearsue@hr.house.gov Rep. Peter King peteking@hr.house.gov Rep. Rick Lazio lazio@hr.house.gov Rep. Nita Lowey nitamail@hr.house.gov Rep. Carolyn Maloney cmaloney@hr.house.gov Rep. Thomas Manton tmanton@hr.house.gov Rep. Michael McNulty mmcnulty@hr.house.gov Rep. Susan Molinari molinari@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerrold Nadler nadler@hr.house.gov Rep. Bill Paxon bpaxon@hr.house.gov Rep. Charles Rangel rangel@hr.house.gov Rep. Jose Serrano jserrano@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Walsh jwalsh@hr.house.gov North Carolina Sen Lauch Faircloth senator@faircloth.senate.gov Sen. Jesse Helms jesse_helms@helms.senate.gov Rep. Cass Ballenger cassmail@hr.house.gov Rep. Richard Burr mail2nc5@hr.house.gov Rep. Sue Myrick myrick@hr.house.gov Rep. Charles Taylor chtaylor@hr.house.gov Rep. Mel Watt melmail@hr.house.gov North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad senator@conrad.senate.gov Sen. Byron Dorgan senator@dorgan.senate.gov Rep. Earl Pomeroy epomeroy@hr.house.gov Ohio Sen. Mike DeWine senator_dewine@dewine.senate.gov Sen. John Glenn senator_glenn@glenn.senate.gov Rep. Sherrod Brown sherrod@hr.house.gov Rep. John Kasich budget@hr.house.gov Rep. Michael Oxley oxley@hr.house.gov Rep. Rob Portman portmail@hr.house.gov Rep. Deborah Pryce pryce15@hr.house.gov Rep. James Traficant telljim@hr.house.gov Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe Sen. Don Nickles senator@nickles.senate.gov Rep. Ernest J. Istook, Jr. istook@hr.house.gov Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith oregon@gsmith.senate.gov Sen. Ron Wyden senator@wyden.senate.gov Rep. Peter DeFazio pdefazio@hr.house.gov Rep. Elizabeth Furse furseor1@hr.house.gov Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum senator@santorum.senate.gov Sen Arlen Specter senator_specter@specter.senate.gov Rep. Jon Fox jonfox@hr.house.gov Rep. Paul Kanjorski kanjo@hr.house.gov Rep. Paul McHale mchale@hr.house.gov Rep.John Murtha murtha@hr.house.gov Rep. Curt Weldon curtpa7@hr.house.gov Rhode Island Sen. John Chafee senator_chafee@chafee.senate.gov Sen. Jack Reed South Carolina Sen. Ernest Hollings senator@hollings.senate.gov Sen. Strom Thurmond senator@thurmond.senate.gov Rep. James E. Clyburn jclyburn@hr.house.gov Rep. Bob Inglis binglis@hr.house.gov Rep. Mark Sanford sanford@hr.house.gov Rep. John Spratt jspratt@hr.house.gov South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle tom_daschle@daschle.senate.gov Sen. Tim Johnson tim@johnson.senate.gov Tennessee Sen. Bill Frist senator_frist@frist.senate.gov Sen Fred Thompson senator_thompson@thompson.senate.gov Rep. Bob Clement clement@hr.house.gov Rep. J.J. Duncan jjduncan@hr.house.gov Rep. Harold Ford hford@hr.house.gov Rep. Bart Gordon bart@hr.house.gov Texas Sen. Phil Gramm Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison senator@hutchison.senate.gov Rep. Joe Barton barton06@hr.house.gov Rep. Lloyd Doggett doggett@hr.house.gov Rep. Martin Frost frost@hr.house.gov Rep. Henry Gonzales bnkgdems@hr.house.gov Rep. Gene Green ggreen@hr.house.gov Rep. Sam Johnson samtx03@hr.house.gov Utah Sen. Robert Bennett senator@bennett.senate.gov Sen. Orrin Hatch senator_hatch@hatch.senate.gov Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords vermont@jeffords.senate.gov Sen. Patrick Leahy senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov Rep. Bernie Sanders bsanders@igc.apc.org Virginia Sen. Charles Robb senator@robb.senate.gov Sen. John Warner senator@warner.senate.gov Rep. Rick Boucher ninthnet@hr.house.gov Rep. Thomas Davis tomdavis@hr.house.gov Rep. Bob Goodlatte talk2bob@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Moran repmoran@hr.house.gov Rep. Owen Pickett opickett@hr.house.gov Washington Sen. Slade Gorton senator_gorton@gorton.senate.gov Sen. Patty Murray senator_murray@murray.senate.gov Rep. Jennifer Dunn dunnwa08@hr.house.gov Rep. George Nethercutt grnwa05@hr.house.gov Rep. Linda Smith asklinda@hr.house.gov Rep. Rick White repwhite@hr.house.gov West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd senator_byrd@byrd.senate.gov Sen. John Rockefeller III senator@rockefeller.senate.gov Rep. Nick Rahall nrahall@hr.house.gov Rep. Bob Wise bobwise@hr.house.gov Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold senator@feingold.senate.gov Sen. Herb Kohl senator_kohl@kohl.senate.gov Rep. Thomas Barrett telltom@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerry Kleczka jerry4wi@hr.house.gov Rep. Scott Klug badger02@hr.house.gov Rep. Mark Neumann mneumann@hr.house.gov Rep. Tom Petri tompetri@hr.house.gov Rep. James Sensenbrenner sensen09@hr.house.gov Wyoming Sen. Craig Thomas craig@thomas.senate.gov Sen. Mike Enzi senator@enzi.senate.gov Guam Del. Robert Underwood guamtodc@hr.house.gov

Re:just to make sure the spambots pick these up... (2, Funny)

tandr (108948) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170466)

If it works as supposed (by law) to, email_removal@response.etracks.com will add spammers address to the list of removing, effectively removing this address and spammer's kissmeplenty20022@hotmail.com from the list.

But if works as it usually works, you effectevely created a cycled list of selfsubcribing spam lists!

Awesome!

Re:just to make sure the spambots pick these up... (1)

2Bits (167227) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170500)

Some more:

contact@etracks.com
support@etracks.com
jobs@e tracks.com
job@etracks.com
career@etracks.com
c eo@etracks.com
jerry.sandoval@etracks.com
jerry@ etracks.com
jsandoval@etracks.com
sandoval@etrac ks.com
todd.lorenz@etracks.com
todd@etracks.com
tlorenz@etracks.com
lorenz@etracks.com
paul.for syth@etracks.com
forsyth@etracks.com
pforsyth@et racks.com
paul@etracks.com
brian.shefts@etracks. com
brian@etracks.com
shefts@etracks.com
bsheft s@etracks.com

Not To Be Confused With... (4, Funny)

ksw2 (520093) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170347)

Not to be confused with Mark A. Fry & Associates [mafa.com].

Re:Not To Be Confused With... (2, Funny)

Kintanon (65528) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170378)

Too bad it's not Mark A Fry Inc. & Associates, then he could be www.mafia.com >:)

Kintanon

Re:Not To Be Confused With... (2)

edrugtrader (442064) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170392)

or mufu.com, the online sports fan site...
or mifi.com, Manaco International Forwarders , inc....
or mefe.com, a silly poem.

what gives? (-1, Troll)

prizzznecious (551920) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170351)

Why is spam such a big deal? Why do Slashdotters go hog-wild and advocate violence against spammers, whose profession's name cannot be typed without heaps of disdain?

They're just trying to make money, and it's really not that hard to delete the stuff. As annoying as it might be (although I guess I must just be better at dealing with my anger than most of the folks here), there's nothing to indicate to me that it's illegal. Why in the world should it be illegal? This is the same Slashdot that seems to hate the idea of the government having any sort of regulatory hand in the internet at all, now clamoring for the government's legal protection from some emails?

As soon as we start allowing the government to regulate commercial email, other, less welcome regulations are sure to follow, in the ostensible interest of national security, or justice, or any of the other stock government facades.

Get a grip, guys. Police ourselves, or we will find ourselves being policed, and we won't like it.

Re:what gives? (3)

travisd (35242) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170377)

Because they cost us money. Bandwidth, CPU, and disk space are NOT free and you, your provider, and the backbone providers are all spending money to handle SPAM. Just because you don't see it on a bill doesn't mean you're not paying for it.

Re:what gives? (1)

prizzznecious (551920) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170416)

I'd rather have them waste a few CPU cycles than give up the essential liberty of the internet; anyway, I imagine that a lot of those wasted resources (perhaps not the bandwidth) come from ineffective spam-prevention measures. It's easier just to click delete. And let's not forget that the spammers pay for bandwidth too.

It's really just not a big deal, and until you can show me some convincing numbers that suggest it is, it's going to appear to me that you people are all up in a tizzy about nothing.

Re:what gives? (1)

gmack (197796) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170473)

Spammers most certainly do NOT pay for bandwidth. It's a side benefit to using open relays. 1 msg with 200 recipiants is a lot of b/w savings for the original sender.

And lets not forget the mail bomb of bounces/hate mail sent to whoever happens to own the domain the spammer is foraging.

Re:what gives? (5, Insightful)

lblack (124294) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170492)

Spam has rendered my hotmail address absolutely useless. I've had that address for around 4.5 years, now. It was a nice address. It was easy to remember, because it was my name@hotmail.com. No numbers, no funky underscoring, banging, etc. It was simple, elegant, and nobody ever forgot it. (My name@biggest free e-mail provider.com).

Now, however, I receive about 20 spam a day to that address. I miss messages that I should be receiving. After going two months while travelling without internet access, I returned to discover nothing *but* spam in my inbox -- hotmail had automatically deleted the older messages on the assumption that I would want to keep the newer ones.

Now, my hotmail block-list is full, and I have about another 200 addresses I would like to add to it. I cannot use that account, because it is now fundamentally useless. And spammers don't cost me money?

Spammers cost money everytime they send an ad that a distracted person clicks on, and gets shipped off to a porn site. That red-flags the corporate internet policy manager or whoever, who has to then go TALK to that employee about their going to a porn site. Sure, they just show the spam and say "Oops". It costs both of those people at least half an hour, though, and at $100 an hour, that's an expensive piece of e-mail.

The bandwidth used is not inconsiderable, either, particularly for people who are using dial-up accounts in regions where they pay-by-minute.

Spam is hardly a victimless crime, it's just a stupid one, and it's all opportunity or possible cost, so it's hard to really say "oh, that cost us money". It definitely costs money. It cost me my fucking hotmail account, and discarded my lengthy correspondence with folk hero Donovan, for Chrissakes.

Bah.
l

Re:what gives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170509)

It's really just not a big deal, and until you can show me some convincing numbers that suggest it is, it's going to appear to me that you people are all up in a tizzy about nothing.

When @Home shut down their email servers I went from 60+ messages a day to 1-5 messages a week, and have not had more than 2 people say they haven't been able to get ahold of me because I forgot to tell them my new email address. The vast majority of those messages on @Home came from @Home selling their email addresses in the first place, and were a complete waste of time spent searching through messages for those that were actually important to me.

Not to mention that the spammers have gotten extremely good at bypassing filters, and I just love seeing my own email address in the from and reply-to fields.

Re:what gives? (4, Informative)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170379)

There are specific laws in most states against sending spam with forged headers.

These people are not legitimate marketers. They collect names, that much is probably legal, but the illegal part comes when they commit computer trespass, exploiting poorly configured servers, and signing the mail with fraudulent return addresses.

If these crimes take place in other countries, it may be legal, but it is illegal in most of the united states. VA has a personal juristiction clause in the law. If you spam here, then you do business here, you come to court here.

Re:what gives? (1)

dubiousmike (558126) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170383)

Next can we sue the folks who send us local coupons via snail mail? I am tired of looking at those "lost kids". What's more damaging? the handfull of junk snail mail I get everyday (to the environment) or clicking delete for an email?

Re:what gives? (3)

Stonehand (71085) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170387)

A large proportion of spam IS illegal -- Ponzi schemes, "miracle" drugs that don't work, Nigerian bank scams, attempts at stock pump-n-dump, off-shore internet gambling, copyright infringement, importing pharmaceuticals, and other miscellaneous fraudulent activities. That's because most of these can't be advertised legitimately.

Commerce *is* subjected to regulation, you know...

Re:what gives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170396)

Why is spam such a big deal?

Because it effectively constitutes a denial-of-service attack. When I can no longer reliably pick the legitimate mail out of my inbox because of all the forged/deceptive spam coming in, I have suffered a very genuine tort.

Also, because it constitutes theft of services. You do not have the right to use my resources and my ISP's resources without permission, regardless of the nature of your "speech."

This really doesn't require any substantial legislative expansion... they should just enforce the existing laws regarding theft of service against spammers.

Re:what gives? (2)

maxpublic (450413) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170427)

Okay, let's start by going back to mail-bombing the service the spammer is using to dump his mail. Hey, it brings down the ISP and inconveniences the customers, but damn me if it isn't effective at getting a spam account closed down right quick. I did this a number of times in the 'old days' when an ISP proved unresponsive to reason.

Oh, wait - mailbombing is *illegal*, even if it's in retaliation for spam from a stupid or amoral ISP. But spamming, which is a mail-bomb en masse, *isn't*.

So I'm a terrorist; the spammer is a savvy capitalist.

Go figure.

Max

Re:what gives? (2)

gmack (197796) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170432)

The main problem is that were policing ourselves and losing the war.

I use a blacklist and I risk blocking potential customers.

I use content based filters and I risk blocking legit email.

Faked headdres, open relays, isp hopping. I've even had reports of spammers paying people to root boxes and install their own software.

They won't stop until it gets expensive, and until then there are just enough stupid people online to make spam a profitable buisness.

Re:what gives? (5, Insightful)

gilroy (155262) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170436)

Blockquoth the poster:

Why in the world should it be illegal?

How about because spammers take up network resources and user time without being asked to, without being authorized to, and without yielding benefit? It costs a spammer essentially nothing to send an email that will consume perhaps thousands of dollars in lost bandwidth, CPU cycles, and user effort. The cost is not borne by the instigator, but by the unwilling recipient.


Let's say I decided to drop by your house every day and scrawl an ad (or an offensive message) in chalk on the sidewalk. It's easy enough to erase -- just a little water spilled over it. Is it OK, then? What if I decided to do this every day to every house in your neighborhood? What if I got the chalk by, say, dropping by the local public school and absconding with it?


And I don't know what a good anti-spam law would be, but I wish to death that people would stop acting as if it were a priori impossible to write one without somehow opening up all imaginable governmental ills. Good laws do exist, though it's fashionable on slashdot to pretend they don't. A targetted law helping to assign some economic cost to sending spam would help restore the operation of normal market forces. Not all slopes are slippery.

Re:what gives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170451)

well... the majority of slashdotters have terribly small dicks... thus, the 100 daily reminders of just HOW small their dicks are, is certainly cause for concern within the community...

I agree with you that the general /. mentality is contradictory... are you anti-spam psychos libertarians or not? why would you want the government regulating who can and cannot send you e-mail? Oh, I forgot, that small penis thing.

why not just let the FBI run carnivore at YOUR.LOCAL.ISP and have them eat all the emails with keywords in them... like "life, get a"

-h

Re:what gives? (2, Insightful)

derfla8 (195731) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170460)

You have an interesting stand point. Here are my answers to some of your questions:

They're just trying to make money

Sure, by using up resources that they did not pay for. 1) I pay for internet access so that I can communicate with those I want to 2) resources are being wasted to store and forward the spam emails 3) resources are being wasted to delete the email

...it's really not that hard to delete the stuff.

It's really not hard to do a lot of stuff. Like protecting yourself against criminals isn't that hard, perhaps we don't need police? Seriously though, it doesn't matter that it is not difficult. It is the sheer volume. I have some email accounts that I use as "fake" email accounts when I think I'll be spammed by the people I'm giving out my email to. One of these accounts gets at least 50 spams a day. Now if I were some poor newbie, tell me how much effort it would take to filter out the one email a day I get that I did intend to receive. If you don't get enough spam to think it is a problem, just change your email address from samsa@@@anitisocial...com to your real address.

Why in the world should it be illegal? Because in California it is.

"They're just trying to make money" (2)

cje (33931) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170461)

Yeah, and so are drug dealers and kiddie porn peddlers.

Re:"They're just trying to make money" (1)

prizzznecious (551920) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170478)

HAHA. The difference being that drug dealers and kiddie porn peddlers ARE ALL selling something that is illegal. It is not their method of solicitation ("hey you wanna buy X") but their product that gets them in hot water. Anyway, this sort of "analogy" is exactly what I was lamenting in my previous post. How can you possibly justify comparing spammers to actively deleterious members of real society like "drug dealers and kiddie porn peddlers" ?

Re:what gives? (1)

atomhund (548144) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170465)

It's beyond just annoying when you have to spend any significant amount of time sorting through garbage day after day. Sure company's have the right to get the word out about their product, but not at the expense of people's personal time, and the time businesses such as mofo pay their employee's.

to say spam is just an inconvenience is rediculous. we don't have to let government regulate commercial e-mail, we just need laws set up to punish spammers who have been warned time and time again not to harrass people with unwanted junk

Re:what gives? (5, Insightful)

Marasmus (63844) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170467)

Here's the quick and dirty as to why many of the slashdot community have a violent hatred toward spammers: We run mail servers.

I run vectorstar.net, a free hosting service. I would easily wager that greater than 90% of the mail that wriggles through to our users is spam. Thus, 90% of my mail-related disk space and 90% of my mail server processing goes to handling unwanted, unnecessary spam. That's the difference between being able to run a Pentium 100 server or a PIII-1ghz server. Thus, it costs me a LOT of money to deal with spam mail.

The same situation falls true for the majority of businesses. Their mail servers handle far more spam than they do valid email. It leads to serious expenditures on mail server hardware, (in some companies) software, and staff to maintain the servers.

So that's why we hate spam with a passion. :)

Re:what gives? (2)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170468)

Why is spam such a big deal? Why do Slashdotters go hog-wild and advocate violence against spammers, whose profession's name cannot be typed without heaps of disdain?
They're just trying to make money, and it's really not that hard to delete the stuff.


I know you're trolling, but this is an argument I've heard from many people who are not trolls (such as legislators). Generally people confuse spam with a First Amendment issue, or view attacks on it as if laissez faire capitalism were at stake. Spam is a big deal because we are starting to drown in it. Spam traffic has been increasing exponentially. It doubles every X months (although I don't know offhand what X is). After 10X months, when you are receiving 1024 times as much of it as you are now, your ideological blinders might fall off.

Also, they're not "just trying to make money" if they're scamming people.

As soon as we start allowing the government to regulate commercial email, other, less welcome regulations are sure to follow, in the ostensible interest of national security, or justice, or any of the other stock government facades.

Unlike other "problems" the government is looking into (SSSCA, etc.), this is one that really does need fixing.

Re:what gives? (2, Informative)

yasth (203461) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170484)

Well in general we have the right to chose whom we communicate with, if I don't want to listen to someone I can just go away, hang up the phone or tell them not to contact me.
In this case the law firm, this is NOT a class action case, claims they received spam from the company without a valid return adress or a toll free phone number as required by CA law so people can remove themselves; it is also claimed that Etracks did not identify thier comercial messages as required by CA law. The firm then suposedly tracked them down and told them not to send any more messages to them, they did not comply.So the law firm sued.

While one might complain about the need to identify messages in the subject, it seems to go a bit far to say that one should not be able to make someone stop sending you stuff. The supreme court has ruled that the rights to free expresion and free speech do not allow one to annoy others on thier property. A round of messages could be defended as free speech, but to continue mailing after you have been asked not to is to make a nuissance of oneself.

Re:what gives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170487)

Don't be an idiot. This has nothing to do with free speech. It is not the content of the messages that is being regulated, it is the the method of delivery. If California said that you could not send out e-mails about (for example) Islam, then you would have a free speech issue. Look, a guy who wants to sell condoms can set up as many signs as he wants on his own property. He does not have the right to break into your house while you're sleeping and come into your bedroom. That is what spammers are doing (in a nutshell.)

Get em, you mofo lawyers! (1)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170357)

That name is great on so many levels. According to their site [mofo.com], they seek $50 in damages per email! Where does that figure come from? Also, they stated that at $50 per day, their spam suit would be valued at $25000 per day. A bit of math shows that's 500 pieces of spam. I get nearly 100 pieces per day (which I consider pretty low). So does it "cost" me $5000 to click "delete" 100 times? If so, does anyone want to hire me to click "delete" for them? $50 per click.

Re:Get em, you mofo lawyers! (2)

Kintanon (65528) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170389)

Aaaah! but you aren't a lawyer, so you don't bill your time in 1000$/hr increments. I imagine they do. So if they spend an hour each day deleting spam, and there are 5 of them then that's $5K a day in their time wasted, well, in lawyer speak of course.>:)

Kintanon

Lawyersplotation Theme Song (5, Funny)

derrickh (157646) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170358)

Who's the hitech private dick thats a sex machine to all the chicks?
-Mofo!

Who won't let you down when there's spam all around?
-Mofo!

You damn right.
That mofo is one bad mutha-
-Shut your mouth!
I'm just talkin' about Morrison and Foerster.
-We can can dig it!

D

Re:Lawyersplotation Theme Song (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170410)

My kingdom for some moderation points!

Very nice.

It would be nice... (1)

VivisectRob (550902) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170366)

It would be nice if someone could find a way to sue X10 for those goddamn banner ads that pop up every 30 seconds...

Spam laws (1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170368)

California's anti-spam law has already held up under appeals court scrutiny so this may very well be a major setback to the spam industry.

Only if other states have enacted already or will enact tough spam laws like the ones in California.

And for those who consider spam free speech: E-mail messages cost bandwidth. An individual e-mail does not cost much, but when multiplied by the number of spams an individual may receive, and multply that by a corporation's user base, it could add up to a lot of money wasted in unnecessary bandwidth usage. It's definitely not free speech! Just ask the spammees.

Re:Spam laws (1)

dubiousmike (558126) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170503)

How much does it cost for all the junk snail mail we all get?

- landfill space
- incinerator smoke, smog
- trees getting cut down

Re:Spam laws (1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170517)

I didn't say snail mail spam wasn't right, either. And you have some good points, yet no high-powered lawyers are going after snail mailers.

I detest all forms of spam, whether snail mail or e-mail.

The luncheon meat, on the other hand, well maybe.

Good make them pay (2, Interesting)

md_doc (8431) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170369)

I know when I e-mail my lawyer they charge me for about 15 minutes in most cases at an hourly rate of 250 an hour so it makes sense that if this spammer is mailing them all day long they should get charged as well.

homepage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170371)

I think their homepage sucks.

Do I Cheer or just Bomb? (1, Funny)

philovivero (321158) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170380)

The lawyers are suing the spammers.

On the one hand, I want the spammers to die a deserving death. On the other hand, I've worked with lawyers and would kind of like it if there were about 1/100th the number of lawyers we have presently.

I kind of want to fix the whole problem with a daisy cutter or something.

MOFO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170381)

Now they need to hire Samuel L. Jackson as their spokesman and they will be SET!

Hmm. Wonder why (5, Funny)

sharkey (16670) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170391)

From the eTracks homepage:
Not only is your target moving...It's picking up speed.

Now I wonder why that is. Could it be that your "target" is trying to not receive your fucking worthles spam? Perhaps they are satisfied with their penis size? Maybe they don't want to about losing 150 pounds in three days? Perhaps the Ladies Quilting Club down at the retirement center isn't interested in tight teen anal sex?

And so the impossible happened (5, Funny)

Mordain (204988) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170405)

As a collective sigh of longing sounds over the internet the unthinkable has happened. The slashdot community has fallen in love with a law firm.

Do thier IT/Sys Admins read /. ? (4, Interesting)

BrookHarty (9119) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170411)

[snip]Morrison & Foerster employs approximately 1,000 attorneys and 1,350 non-attorney staff in 18 offices worldwide. [/snip]
[snip] Morrison & Foerster was named by Fortune Magazine in its first list of 100 Best Companies to Work for in America. [/snip]

Thats alot of desktop computers and servers for a company, Always wondered how many people from the companies in articles on /. read slashdot. I know I get a kick when the company I work for or related subjects are news posts.

Come on MoFo IT/IS guys, post some replys!

Widening is fixed? (-1)

by FortKnox on (563942) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170412)

.I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enoug

etracks is owned by Learn2.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170413)

According to their own website [etracks.com], eTracks is owned by Learn2.com.

Forged headers (1)

maddugan (549314) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170423)

Can forged headers constitute mail fraud? Identity theft? misrepresentation? Since some (if not most) Spam is sent in a manor to hide the identity of the sender, is it not covered by some existing law. People treat Spam as unsolicited, but its deliver may be more suspect, and in this case, more attackable.

Duplicate stories (2, Flamebait)

Violet Null (452694) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170424)

Ok, I can understand slashdot reposting a story that was reported, say, two months ago. But this story [slashdot.org] was posted _yesterday_. You can tell they're the same story just from the three line blurb on the front page.

Sigh.

test (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3170459)

test

This is a really good sign. (4, Interesting)

Lumpish Scholar (17107) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170476)

The reason people spam is that the cost is low, even in the worst case.

Spammer's worst case just got much worse.

If spamming becomes a risky, possibly very expensive proposition, the big spamhauses could be in trouble. They've got deep enough pockets to be hurt badly by such a suit. Bad news for them; good news for the rest of the Net.

Sadly, it's probably not much of a threat to spammers in China, Russia, etc.

Not Class Action (3, Informative)

CaptainCarrot (84625) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170490)

Geez, don't people read the linked material before posting? Or don't the editors make corrections before sending the thing to the main page? This is not a class action suit. It's Morrison and Foerster suing on their own behalf because of spam sent to users on their own network.

Fight back in your own little way.... (1)

ruvreve (216004) | more than 12 years ago | (#3170499)

Instead of everybody going to the 'cool' homepage of the lawyers how about the entire slashdot audience go to www.etracks.com like 10 times a day for the next month or so. See how they like HIT-SPAMMING. Be advised I have trademarked that term so when hit-spamming becomes popular and everybody is doing it. I'll become rich.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...