6714785
story
Comments: 179 +- Your Rights Online: Facebook Awarded $711 Million In Anti-Spam Case on Friday October 30, @12:46PM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicspam.gif); width:81px; height:64px;
spam
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicdoj.gif); width:50px; height:79px;
court
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicit.gif); width:75px; height:61px;
it
An anonymous reader writes "Facebook is on a never-before-seen legal rampage against high profile internet spammers. Today Facebook was awarded yet another nine-figure settlement, this time for over $700 million. Facebook also has a criminal contempt case on Wallace, which means a high likelihood of prison, a big win for the internet and a milestone in cyber law. 'The record demonstrates that Wallace willfully violated the statutes in question with blatant disregard for the rights of Facebook and the thousands of Facebook users whose accounts were compromised by his conduct,' Jeremy Fogel wrote in his judgment order, which permanently prohibits Wallace from accessing the Facebook Web site or creating a Facebook account, among other restrictions."
Related Stories
Submission: Facebook on Spammer Rampage by Anonymous Coward
Executive ability is prominent in your make-up.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.
A Time Line of Sanford Wallace (Score:5, Insightful)
2004-10-08 FTC files suit against Wallace to stop infecting computers with spyware that promised to remove the problem for $30.
2006-03-22 FTC files suit against Wallace--Wallace and co-defendants fined for over $5 million.
2008-01-26 MySpace awarded $230 million from Wallace in LA.
2009-10-29 (Yesterday) Facebook awarded $711 million from Wallace.
If you say seven hundred million and jail time is too much, I say it isn't enough. A warning didn't stop him, five million didn't stop him, two hundred million didn't stop him and I'm sure seven hundred million won't stop him. Throw the book at him and lock him up--this is definition CAN-SPAM Act. And he's a heavy repeat offender, it's not like this guy was blindsided with a surprise ruling. Spam is too kind of a label for this guy, I would hit him for extortion and identity theft on massive scales in addition to CAN-SPAM.
How he continued to operate with a two hundred million dollar loss a year and a half ago is beyond me. Is he just declaring bankruptcy (like he did back June '09 [insidefacebook.com]), rolling over and doing it again? Or avoiding states where there's a warrant for his arrest or what?
Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace (Score:5, Insightful)
Heh. Nice. But the problem is as old as humanity itself: forbidding is one thing, preventing is quite another. I agree, jailtime is the only way to go for a recidivist like that. And he's just abusing international law and such: just because you go bust in one country doesn't mean you can't have $500m tucked away in another. Until treaties are formed which address these problems - and thankfully, tax havens have come under heavy fire of late - this type of crap is just going to continue.
What I don't get is why a joker like that - who is obviously intelligent - doesn't just find a legal way to get rich. It can't be that hard.
Parent
Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace (Score:5, Insightful)
It can't be that hard.
Yes, well, it can be that hard. There are lots of intelligent people who aren't and can't be rich, although they want to be.
More than intelligence is required.
And apparently, for this guy, he's skilled in getting rich using uncouth methods. It's what he's familiar with, it's what comes easy for him (I suppose)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
easily go get a job on Wall Street. Then he could make millions just as unethically, but legally.
It still isn't that easy because of competition. On Wall Street, there are thousands of ruthless, smart people who would do anything to be super rich. Don't be fooled by what you see in the media. Most people on Wall Street are not super rich just like most actors in Hollywood are not super stars. The vast majority are working really hard to give themselves a chance to hit it big. Being super smart and super unethical doesn't make you special on Wall Street. By being a spammer, he didn't have competit
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What I don't get is why a joker like that - who is obviously intelligent - doesn't just find a legal way to get rich. It can't be that hard.
Maybe he doesn't want to.
Most people who are really good at doing something got to be that good because they enjoy doing it.
If he enjoyed doing something that is both profitable and legal, then he'd probably be just as rich with no legal problems. But he doesn't. He enjoys doing exactly what he is doing.
That is not funny at all. (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
If there's a warrant for his arrest why don't they nab him and extradite him?
Surely the US Marshals can't be THAT clueless...
Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace (Score:5, Interesting)
You notice that there's a billion dollars in risk here?
Sounds to me like there is considerable incentive to be an epic scale douchebag of the internet. You'd think he'd be a gajillionaire, right?
Except...
"As of October 2003, he is working as a DJ in Las Vegas, making weekly appearances at OPM nightclub (name changed to 'Poetry Nightclub' October 5, 2007) in Caesars Palace Forum Shops on the Las Vegas Strip. Wallace performs under the name DJ MasterWeb.[8]"
"Wallace filed for bankruptcy in June, 2009. On 2009-10-29, a Northern California District Court Judge awarded Facebook $711M in damages.[12]. Although unlikely to collect due to his bankruptcy, the presiding judge in the case also recommended Criminal Contempt charges against Wallace, who may face jail time as a result." -wiki
So uh, it's not like he's ridonculously wealthy as a result of being a sleezebag? What gives???
Parent
Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace (Score:4, Insightful)
1) They'd have to actually find him first (odds are good that all but the first cases were done with him in absentia).
2) Good luck collecting.
3) this may sound a bit trollish, but a thought occurred to me: as of right now, Spamford Wallace likely owes enough money to buy a brand new ballistic missile submarine. No one will ever see so much as a dime from him. So... why did they even bother? It's similar to the RIAA and Jammie Thomas - there comes a point where it becomes less of a statement and more of a parody. Trust me, I have zero sympathy for the son of a bitch, but do we have to make a mockery of our own legal system just to make a point?
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No, we need a criminal conviction, not a "debtor's prison". In some states you cannot discharge by bankruptcy a civil outcome that proceeds from a criminal conviction. I.e., we need to go after folks like this criminally. His actions are clearly criminal. What Facebook should have done was sued the DA.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Make him work it off in a sweatshop for the rest of his days.
"Mr. Wallace, you are hereby sentenced to spend the remainder of your natural life logged in to a mail client pressing the delete key."
Facebook for Grand Nagus. Re:A Time Line (Score:3, Funny)
Facebook should be appointed Grand Nagus for coming up with such a lucrative idea.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Spammer makes profit from facebook users. Facebook (+lawyers) make profit from spammer. Is this a new business model? Why isn't this a class-action lawsuit?
Stupid Name (Score:3, Insightful)
Does anyone else find it ironic that the "Can-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming, specifically from the false and misleading type?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Does anyone else find it ironic that the "Can-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming, specifically from the false and misleading type?
I believe the intent was to have the first word in CAN-SPAM be a verb, with the meaning of "can" being, "to throw in the trash."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it's such a weak law (and probably intentionally so) that it means that you can spam with impunity.
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone else find it ironic that the "Can-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming
Yes, it's ironic, in this context it's meant as "to put it in a can", you know, like the meat Spam.
And this guy is going to go spend time in a metal box, so it seems fitting.
Re:Stupid Name (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, it's ironic, in this context it's meant as "to put it in a can", you know, like the meat Spam.
You mean, the thing you do to spam before you deliver it to millions of people all over the world?
Parent
Idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean hey, if the money ever actually does come in, it's perfectly viable given how often people spam Facebook users.
Re: (Score:2)
That was my first idea when I heard the numbers! I somehow doubt it'll work out, but it's an interesting thought.
Good ol' Spamford (Score:5, Insightful)
Sweet merciful crap, is Spamford Wallace [wikipedia.org] still around? We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago. His C.V. reads like list of things that are wrong with the Internet. If there were ever someone that the world would be a better place without, it's this guy.
Wrong "Method and Process" for stopping spammers (Score:2)
We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago.
Obviously, stabbing the voodoo dolls had no effect.
I would suggest that the Court anoint its forearm with Tabasco, and fist Mr. Wallace.
. . . and I do mean him, and not the voodoo doll. Then, he might get the message.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If you aren't willing to carry out the sentence yourself, with your parents watching, you don't really believe in it.
SO.. (Score:4, Funny)
Nice (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Whoever modded this as troll is unfair... I think it was kinda witty and should have at least got a Funny or two.
It is kinda funny to see an individual taken to the cleaners by a corporation and the /. crowd being pleased about it.
Re:Nice (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
SANFORD Wallace? (Score:3, Funny)
Time for the death penalty (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Time for the death penalty (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hmm, this is an interesting concept. However, to carry it to its natural extreme.... what then would we do with Microsoft?
What would we do with Slashdot?
Re:Time for the death penalty (Score:5, Funny)
And an appropriate execution method might be death by ten thousand paper cuts. Or just leave him naked in mosquito country at the start of the season. I mean, it's not like any one cut or bite is that serious....
Parent
Re:Time for the death penalty (Score:5, Funny)
Force him to eat nothing but spam until he dies of malnutrition.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Are you for real? (Score:4, Insightful)
There's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing.
Are you trying to actually accomplish something or are you just trying to make yourself feel better?
from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society
OK, we'll go for the latter (much) more so than the former.
There are multiple reasons that any sensible person can quickly come up with as to why this would be a useless guesture:
And thats just getting started...
You'd might as well use a voodoo doll, it would be just as effective and far less expensive.
Parent
Re:Time for the death penalty (Score:4, Interesting)
Bleeding heart conservatives...
Look, when I die, it's likely to be a horrible ordeal. Have you ever seen anyone in the last stages of Alsheimer's or cancer? You're going to die in a car wreck or other accident, of some terrible disease. Very few are as lucky as my late ex-mother in law, who just stopped in mid sentence like a robot whose battery was yanked out.
We're all under a sentence of death, and most of us are sentenced to death by torture. And we have no idea when it will happen. You might live to be 110, or you may keel over ten minutes from now.
The man condemned by other men to die, on the other hand, know exactly when they're going to die. They have a chance to make their peace with any creator they happen to believe in. Then they are painlessly and without muss or fuss humanely put to sleep like a beloved pet.
I'd rather they die naturally, in prison, when their time comes, letting them think about the horror they have wreaked on people.
You capital punishment advocates are far too kind.
Parent
How is Facebook going to distribute... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Where do I add this new app? (Score:5, Funny)
"Facebook's application for a default judgment against Wallace for violating the Can-Spam Act"
Cool new app!
I crack myself up.
This sounds like a fantastic business model... (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Start Web 2.0 web site utilizing every buzzword you can find
2) Desparately woo users until you get large enough to matter
3) Sit down a year or more later to desperately figure out a revenue model
4) Provide Spammers a way to proliferate
5) Sue them!
6) PROFIT$$$$$$$
Not only that, but this also avoids the usual problem in Slashdot business plans in that there is no question marks in either steps 3 or 4.
Anyone got a good idea?
Facebook business model unveiled! (Score:2)
Stop the invites (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't hold your breath... (Score:3, Informative)
What's in a name? (Score:3, Funny)
Facebook is now the government? (Score:3, Insightful)
From the summary:
I thought criminal cases were always "The State v. ___" or another government agency. I have a hard time believing that Facebook has a criminal case against the guy.
Is there a lawyer in the house (or at least someone who plays lawyer on Slashdot)?
Re:Free Viagra! (Score:4, Informative)
The CAN-SPAM act ruined it by superceding prior federal law that made sending junk faxes/e-mail subject to a per-message penalty to be paid to the recipient, prior to the act.
Before then.. individuals did sometimes did sue spammers, I believe it was ~$500/message..
Parent