Microsoft Files 15 Lawsuits Against Spammers 392
Popsikle writes "A Seattle Paper reports that 'Microsoft Corp. announced it has filed 15 lawsuits against alleged e-mail spammers in Washington state and the United Kingdom on Tuesday.' It states the tough anti-spam laws in UK and Washington allows ISP's to sue spammers. This could be a good test of the new anti-spam laws." There's coverage on CNN as well. Microsoft has picked a good venue for such a case.
Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Insightful)
also blocking anti-spam legislation.
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercuryn
"We have personnel around the world engaged in those battles, and we are tapping that expertise and working with these people to fight spam as well." Can't they do the simple exercise of examining their own user's spam - hotmail users can give billions in a day.
If hotmail users could even get $5 per spam, they'd be richer than Tiger Woods.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:4, Interesting)
Why? 'Cos the ISP (Internet Spam provider) gets to sue on your behalf (the user) and reap profits? Is spam is so inevitable and untracable, why not allow users to profit from it; if at all they succeed in tracking the source.
There's more to this than meets the eye, surely.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Funny)
You may be right, but don't call me Shirley.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Informative)
And I think this is great, personally. If all major ISPs did this, SPAM load would go down significantly. Of course it wouldn't disappear completely, and the really tricky spammers would be trickier, but the overall load would certainly go down and the remaining SPAM would very likely be easier to block...
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:3, Informative)
To enlighten you would take far more time then I have. In fact, I suspect that the sun would go cold long before knowledge pentrated the thickness of your skull.
So, simply put:
The First Amendment, aka Freedom of Speech, only applies to the government attempting to abridge speech. If a ISP says "You can't send spam on our servers", then tough shit, cousin, it's not a First Amendment violation.
Kierthos
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:4, Insightful)
But really, that wasn't what I was thinking of originally--I like Washington's law because it is less restrictive; as long as a piece of e-mail is clearly labeled and meets other requirements, it's not in violation. This will allow through some spam that California's law doesn't, sure--but it also means that if I want to individually (not en masse, mind you) cold-email a prospective client on a web design project, I don't have to worry about getting sued.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this is reasonable. The big difference is that when legitimate businesses are sending me unsolicited email, I can click the "remove" link with confidence that I will be removed, not sent more spam. That, and unlike "Enlarge your member!", and porn spam, I'm not going to get in trouble at work for accidentally looking at the Palm Voice in a shared office.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah... like we all know how the industry self-regulated itself during the browser wars, virus wars and virus-alert wars. We all know how 'Java' and 'Trustworthy Computing' and 'DRM' - 'Evolved' over time.
Looks like MS is suing now, since they may not get another chance once a sensible law is passed.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Interesting)
Just look at K-Mart for a great example of this -- I have yet to get them to remove one of my forwarding aliases from their stupid system.
Why? Some idiot manager bought a cd of 5 million emails to add to their "Bluelight CRAP" email book. One, of course, was the harvested alias of mine.
So, I called them. Told them in no uncertain terms to take that off.
"But sir, why don't you just send the unsubscribe from that email account?"
It's a fucking forwarding alias. I CANNOT SEND MAIL FROM IT. Therefore I never opted in. But K-Mart won't unsubscribe without an email specifically from that address.
We went back and forth on this for about 15 minutes. I asked for the manager of their phone bank for the email division and got him. He denied ever doing something like that. Then he told me straight-out that only by sending an email to them could I have gotten subscribed in the first place so obviously I had opted in and could opt out the same way.
He's obviously a fucking liar and DID buy a scavenged email CD from someone, or else they did a web harvest themselves.
Don't kid yourselves. You can't trust the unsubscribe from a so-called "legitimate" business any more than you can the one from the spammers.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes you can. Just about any mailer lets you set the "from" address to whatever you want.
>He's obviously a fucking liar and DID buy a scavenged email CD from someone, or else they did a web harvest themselves.
Unless somebody else opted in from your mail address. Or you accidentally entered it on a web form and forgot to uncheck the "opt-in" checkbox.
This kind of ire and anti-corporate attitude is not in any way constructive. Big corporations are a permanent part of our economic system, and in many cases, provide useful goods and services that we all enjoy (major airlines, for instance). I'll be the first to admit that in some cases the corps well overstep their bounds and need to be put in their place (cf Microsoft, SCO, RIAA); but the vast majority of them are in it to make money, which they do best by serving the customer's interest. And when you have a personal problem with a corp, it usually doesn't mean the corp is bad, it means somebody isn't doing their job. Call customer service, write the CEO, and usually things work out in the end.
If nothing else, when K-Mart spams you, you know whom to sue. The big problem with most spam is if you don't know where it's coming from, you're powerless to stop it.
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you aware that the 'from' address in e-mails is an arbitrary string you enter into your e-mail client software? Just change that string to equal the forwarding address, send the 'remove' message, and then change it back. Piece 'o cake.
"Don't kid yourselves. You can't trust the unsubscribe from a so-called "legitimate" business any
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:3, Interesting)
THIS IS NOT REASONABLE! (Score:5, Insightful)
``We don't think all commercial e-mail should be banned,'' he said. Microsoft favors self regulation by the industry ``to establish standards that can evolve over time,'' he said.
and you think it's reasonable?
It's typical duplicity from M$, "I won't let you do what I do, and that's how we make our money and bring you software that does what you wan." Microsoft has been trying all along to criple it's "client" machines so that they are dependent on Microshaft "server" machines and all dependent on M$. It does not do what I want it to and never will.
Mass mailing is just one more instance of "client" gelding and they have media help for it. A lack of mail agents in M$ software is typical, where the free world has many such as Sendmail and Exim. Their intrests here line up with traditional publishers who wish to keep the playing field uneven. To bring this lack of mailing ability to free software, AOL/MSN and others have sucessfully threatened smaller ISPs to block both inbound and outbound port 25 traffic [expressresponse.com]. Forcing a cable company to give up a competitive advantage like web and mail serving stinks like an anti-trust violation, but that's what a tech told me happend recently when I was forced to use their smtp server as a relay for the first time. The excuse given was to keep cracked M$ boxes from spamming, so M$ created the problem to begin with and the cracking spammers did not lack mail agents, and it's not likely to help. No other smtp server could be used but theirs, enabling Carnivore and censorship, disabling TLS and privacy.
This is absolutely what the internet is NOT about. The internet is supposed to be a network of peer computers. There's not supposed to be central control or a difference between the ability of one computer and another. Microsoft never liked the internet anyway. They really hate free software that gives people ability that M$ doea not want them to have. Microsoft thinks it owns the internet and can make it into the next broadcast TV. They can, as long people think such things are reasonable.
Re:THIS IS NOT REASONABLE! (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll be the first to admit that Microsoft has some nasty business practices that need to be stopped. That said, this DOES NOT MEAN that everything Microsoft does is inherently evil, just because they are Microsoft.
As far as your comments regarding what "the internet is NOT about" and what "the internet is supposed to be," I would remind you that the internet is what it is. Technologies evolve, and the internet is probably the best example. The internet is a big enough place to accomodate peer-to-peer as well as client-server models.
Being required to use your ISP's SMTP server is not a big deal. SMTP security helps fight spam, and really, one SMTP server is as good as another, as long as the mail gets where it's going.
As a civil libertarian and a reasonable person, I respect your right to disagree with me. Please do so freely and openly, but understand that grandstanding and declaring that my speech will mean the end of the free world and the eventual domination of Microsoft is not constructive and serves only to weaken your point (good points stand on their own, without such outrageous claims stapled to them.)
Re:THIS IS NOT REASONABLE! (Score:3, Insightful)
What's the competivie reason for the other ports in your link being blocked (Netbios, SQL, SubSeven). Seems if I was microsoft and throwing around my weight I wouldn't want you to block my SQL communication paths nor Netbios.
Look that fact is your post is major troll. ISPs have been blocking port 25 because spammers have been causing them tremendous pain. Ye
Re:Gorilla Against Spam!! (GAS) (Score:5, Interesting)
(b) MS has the legal resources to really have a go at the spammers (and at the least make sure they get a lot of publicity about it)
Even if they lose, MS will be able to file their legal expenditures under "usefully spent money" in terms of the good publicity they'll buy re: the average joe on the street (and if they win they'll get the PR for free since they'll be recouping $$). All of a sudden they'd no longer be a corporation whose executives were repeatedly caught out prevaricating during their last trial, but instead a corp taking action to help everybody...
Re:One More TIme... (Score:2)
The news item states 15 spammers, 13 in the US and 2 in the UK. Bang goes your theory.
Re:One More TIme... (Score:3, Informative)
Before that it was chinanet.com.net (or some other stupid variation). They stopped about two weeks after Sprint started asking for copies of the spams. Thank you Sprint.
My Turn to sue! (Score:2)
That happened to our entire computer network 2 weeks ago. All of those deceptive messages from BillGates@microsoft.com
I will sue you, you will pay me. If it wasn't you Microsoft, please sue the people who spoofed your address, and recoup from them.
Thank you.
Re:My Turn to sue! (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh no. No no no no NO. If someone spoofs millions of spams, coming from your e-mail address, and you end up being sued for vast amounts of money as a result, would you consider it fair? It is in no way Microsoft's fault that someone faked their address, and as such they shouldn't be sued for it.
I'm not sure they should be suing for it, either, although I'm strongly of the opinion that pretending to be someone else, in whatever medium, should be illegal. I believe in the right to anonymity, not the right to tell everyone you're me!
Full list of charges including details (Score:5, Informative)
[microsoft.com]
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/J
</karmawhore>
Re:Full list of charges including details (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft? Spammers? (Score:5, Funny)
My brain hurts!
Re:Microsoft? Spammers? (Score:3, Insightful)
The hatred against the spammers is stronger 'round here. I've never seen a Slashdot campaign to subscribe Bill Gates to hundreds of magazines and newsletters, after all; and the worst I've seen done to Ballmer is the Monkey-Dance video.
Re:Microsoft? Spammers? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Microsoft? Spammers? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, guess who has a bussiness relationship with 99% of the computerusers?
They're just killing some competition, making a few bucks and some goodwill. And soon we will see the announcement for "Windows DC" for "Direct Communication with our valued custommers".
Don't you worry, with a little fantasy MS is s
Re:Microsoft? Spammers? (Score:3, Insightful)
ahhh crap...... (Score:5, Funny)
We hate Microsoft.
Microsoft sues spammers.
Dangit.
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:5, Funny)
Ha, that's like 'school nerds, telling high school jocks where to go since 1991 - "jocks, please go to the prom and screw the hottest chicks in school"'.
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:2, Troll)
"What the hell would I want a hot chick for? At least my computer comes with documentation. These hot chicks have too many undocumented features and there's just not enough time in my high school career to figure it out!"
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:5, Funny)
On my first date with my girlfriend, I wore the shirt that said:
...the nice thing is that she actually got the joke!
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:2, Funny)
I'm still waiting.
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:2, Funny)
One of them has to lose.
We like to see them lose.
It's a win-win situation for us! Either the spammers lose and stop making money from their disgusting trade, or M$ loses and wastes their money suing the spammers. I say they deserve each other!
And across the world... (Score:2)
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft files 15 lawsuits against spammers to preserve HD space on Hotmail servers, and to make a bit of money
For the Microsoft lovers out there:
Microsoft files 15 lawsuits against spammers to prevent their customers from receiving unwanted mail
Re:ahhh crap...... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't worry, you can still hate M$! (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't like MS sticking ads into hotmail messages, don't use them - it's not hard. It's not like you don't have other options for email.
So damn Microsoft for making your life worse by providing your wife with a free e-mail address. And damn them even more for suing
This is a win-win situation! (Score:5, Funny)
And this time I don't even care how much money is sunk into the greedy hands of their respective lawyers.
Great but... (Score:5, Insightful)
AFAIK, some spammers go to great lengths to keep their identities hidden (hi-jacking other people's computer systems etc) so although the threat of legal action will be a big deterrent there's always going to be spam unless we can come up with a technological solution to stop it.
Re:Great but... (Score:5, Funny)
True, but not particularly relevant. A convincing demonstation that spamming is likely to result in 2-5 years of testing the effectiveness of your cellmate's herbal Viagra and penile enhancement, won't deter everybody, but it will deter enough people to keep the bandwidth theft level down to something manageable.
Re:Great but... (Score:2)
Physician, bite thyself (Score:4, Insightful)
Gee, you mean like producing a secure operating system and email applications? How funny would it be if it goes to court and the spammers had to testify how easy it was to hijack Windows systems.
Re:Physician, bite thyself (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not trolling, remember that most of the email sent comes through unix systems, remember that there are plenty unpatched systems around, and plenty more where the admin either doesn't care or doesn't know he's running an open relay.
Re:Don't sue the spammer: sue the ADVERTIZER (Score:3, Interesting)
That's not entirely true. Some spammers will send out fake spam, often as a means of retaliation against various anti-spam advocates. For example, here [quatloos.com] is one such case.
If it becomes standard practice to sue the advertisers in spam, spammers will just include more random, innocent third-parties in their spamming runs. The result will be enough doubt over guilt that it'd be impossible to figure out who was really responsible.
so (Score:2, Interesting)
Yay for Microsoft! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yay for Microsoft! (Score:2)
You are correct sir. We will ignore all of Microsofts negative qualities! Everything is in the past, because 1 department of the corperate giant which is Microsoft happens to be using our legal system to sue for a whole mess load of money that none of us will ever see.
Microsoft doing it because it will make them money. Woohoo.
You're right. Maturity. I love Microsoft. Get me a copy of XP right
Re:Yay for Microsoft! (Score:2, Insightful)
Hardly. What you and other seem to forget that while Microsoft may be able to sue for $500 (or $1000) per, it's not like the Spammers are going to have that type of money. In other words, If they only have $20,000 Microsoft can sue them for $100 million, but they're not going to get more than $20,000.
After you factor in the cost of Microsoft's lawyers, I seriously doubt they'll make any meaningful amount of money...at least meaningful to Microso
Re:Yay for Microsoft! (Score:3, Insightful)
You make a fair point, but the good press will be worth it's weight in gold, which I'm sure is what Microsoft is thinking.
Re:You missed the real benefit of the lawsuit (Score:2)
Any ISP that tries to reduce spam via logical, and technilogical ways should be praised. However I do not beileve we should praise Microsoft for suing spammers.
Why should they benefit from the wrong doings that affect customers? My opinion is that the benefit should be the customers, and not the ISP.
I didn't miss the benefits of the lawsuit, I see them clearly. The benefits of the law s
How long until SCO gets sued? (Score:2)
Goodwill towards all (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft: "We're on your side"
Microsoft: "We hate spammers too!"
Microsoft: "We're fighting for the little guy"
etc, etc, etc.
The cost of a few million (drops in their bucket) of court costs might go a long way in falsly convincing some people that Microsoft actually cares about the little guy.
Just a though.
Re:Goodwill towards all (Score:3, Interesting)
More likely, they are doing it to reduce the amount of spam heading in towards Hotmail and their MSN services. The cost of managing this must be large and it may even be hurting them in the fight for the MSN-AOL user segment.
In the long term, they may also be doing it as a good deal of spam is sent with their domain as a return address or with Microsoft trademarks in th
Microsoft DOES care (Score:4, Insightful)
The little guys impressions are important, as long as they add up and might seriously affect business.
In this case, Microsoft is the biggest karma whore of them all.
Regards,
--
*Art
MS will do the spamming (Score:2)
business as usual
Please add Network Solutions (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Please add Network Solutions (Score:2, Interesting)
I rarely get junk mail from NSI; I don't consider it spam because I have an actual honest-to-god business relationship with them that involves me paying them money in exchange for their services, I knowingly and willingly gave them my e-mail address, and I believe the opt-out link actually works.
I don't know wh
Ack! (Score:2, Funny)
Hate Microsoft [userfriendly.org]; hate spam [spam.com].
Evil greedy corporation; slimy pollution of the Internet.
Illegally abusing their monopoly [usdoj.gov]; illegally hijacking servers [osirusoft.com].
Overpriced software [microsoft.com]; lowest mortgage rates ever [list-news.com].
Bug-ridden products; barnyard porn [theregister.co.uk].
Embrace and extend; extend your manhood [oneill.net].
No concept of security [theregister.co.uk]; special offers on SystemWorks 2003 [212.100.234.54].
Never innovating; always innovating.
I'm siding with Microsoft.
*sob*
Re:Ack! (Score:2)
I think I am the only person siding with Spam on this one, but don't worry.
I'm crying too.
I'd love to see this trial in person (Score:5, Funny)
Woooo! WOOOO! (Score:2)
I'm very liberal. The first ammendment is sacred to me. I believe in free speech to the extreme. But, quite frankly, spammers piss me off. Now, I don't mind the KKK, or any of the other myriad hate-mongering groups speaking their collective minds, because it's their right to do so. I very much -do- mind being bombarded with pe3n
The cost of spam to MS (Score:4, Insightful)
Then again, it might not matter to such a large company... but it's MS, there must be some monetary explanation for all this
Let them RBL some of the spammers (Score:3, Interesting)
While Microsoft is suing the spammers, they're not doing much to block them. Are they? Some bayesian filters and RBLing with a bit of context analysis (50K people get the same email in 2 minutes) might just prevent them the agony of having to sue people.
The Sound of One Hand Clapping (Score:2)
The ghost of J.P. Morgan: "What is good in life?"
Bill Gates: "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to here the lamentation of their women!"
Just because there's a fight... (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't mean it has to be Good vs. Evil.
Fights can be Evil vs. Evil, too.
Nuremberg files solution? (Score:2)
Complete data on spammers. Name, address, phone numbers, place of business/employment, car make/model/license plate. Photos of spammers, their families, homes, and cars, etc.
Put a bright spotlight on these roaches and watch em scramble. Thanks to the pro-life/anti-abortion movement, this tactic is perfectly legal.
The only question is how long it would take spammers to start launching DDOS attacks on it.
MS is a spammer, kind of (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, it's all supposedly "opt-in," but the bcentral spams I have received tell me otherwise.
Lovely (Score:4, Insightful)
And Korean spam? (Score:3, Informative)
So this ends up in the next global legislation mess: we all agree that we need global legislation, but the big fight is whether is will be US, European or one of the SE Asian.
And this mess will only be solved when all governments have the same interests.
Re:And Korean spam? (Score:3, Funny)
So are you claiming that there has been no global action because our world leaders are interested in the emails about penis enlargement?
Or maybe they've taken a ride on the bang bus, and enjoyed it.
Or maybe they weren't able to get an official pack of patriot cards, and wanted a reproduction.
Or maybe they like to see every hole filled.
Or maybe they need an email to tell them that a horney housewife is waiting for them.
this is probably redundant by now but... (Score:2, Interesting)
Compare that to my yahoo account, in which I have never ever recieved any spam in the 12months that I've been using it...
surely Microsoft are doing something wrong somewhere? How is it that Yahoo can make it so that I r
In other news today... (Score:5, Funny)
Darth Vader, Lord of Sith and Supreme Commander of the Imperial Fleet, has announced today his intention to sue Sauron of Mordor, the official "Dark Lord" of Middle Earth, for violating his Intellectual Property (IP).
Darth Vader spokesdroid K4VC5 briefly commented to the intergalactic press: "Darth Vader is, most certainly, the original Dark Lord, and we feel that Sauron of Mordor, no matter how creative and evil, has no right to call himself the 'Dark Lord' of Middle Earth". He added that Darth Vader legal team would pursue damages worth "several billions" of Galactic Credits.
Sauron, Dark Lord of Middle Earth, was unavailable to comment, but well-informed sources close to Mordor report that "his evilness" promised to rain death and destruction on the first legal storm trooper to ever set foot on Middle Earth.
Darth Vader spokesdroid also confirmed that Lucifer, the star attorney of Mephistopheles, Baal, Satan & Associates Law Firm (LLC) has been retained to defend a case which promises to be one of the toughest legal fight in the history of Evil(tm).
Lucifer first (and best known) legal battle involved the semitic God YHWH (pronounced: "Yahweh") for the control of the "Garden of Eden" real-estate property. That case was widely considered a draw, and was settled out of court.
Dr Evil, widely considered as an authority on Evil(tm) only commented: "Bwa ha ha ha ha ha!", and declined to elaborate any further.
That's all for business news. Film at 11.
Why not make an ammendment to the MS EULA? (Score:5, Insightful)
What might stop this from happening? Why wouldn't we make this a part of the GPL? I think everybody besides spammers hates spam, right?
-S
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Because MS does not want to test EULAs. (Score:3, Funny)
If that's the standard, then no document is binding on a spammer unless it's written in orange crayon using Dr. Seuss vocabulary.
Re:Because MS does not want to test EULAs. (Score:5, Funny)
You may not use it to send spam!
You may not use it for a scam!
Never thought I'd say it... (Score:3, Insightful)
See i do say nice things about M$ when they deserve it.
anti-spam bills (Score:3, Informative)
Well, except that they haven't been enacted yet, and there's this little thing called Ex Post Facto [google.com]. Also, the most effective anti-spam bills are unfortunately not the most likely to pass Congress:
- Schumer's bill endorsed by CAUCE [washingtonpost.com]
- Schumer seeks international anti-spam treaty [google.com]
But Tauzin's pro-spam bill will probably get the votes.It's not PR, but it's not for goodwill either. (Score:4, Insightful)
BBC2 'money programme' on spammers tonight (Score:5, Informative)
If you're in the UK, or have access to BBC2 tonight, watch it!
Rather 2-faced don't you think? (Score:4, Insightful)
But can they do it? (Score:3, Insightful)
The spam community is just as resolved at surviving any attacks as the Linux community.
I'm against all forms of commertal e-mail myself not becouse it's all evil but becouse spammers are so evil in the way they twist everything.
The opt out system was part of e-mail lists everywhere. Someone somehow accadentally opts you in or worse dose so as a prank so you opt out again. Spammers then include the opt out system and ignore it or worse use it to scoop up e-mail addresses.
Every time lagit commertal e-mail finds some way to make it obveous they are lagit the spammer community copys them and suddenly the spam looks lagit too.
I've nothing against opt in spam. I've opt in to some spam myself BUT what I've welcomed into my system is flooeded over with junk I've never agreed to.
Every now and then I get this "Thank you for joining !!!!!" if you don't opt out you get spam from them if you do they sell your e-mail address.
And there are thousands of other tricks. They just keep comming up with new ways to thwart filters bypass spam blockers and be generally annoying.
So now Microsoft is taking on spam.....
Well... ummmmm Go Microsoft.. we hope you'll be successful in a way we know can't happen.
But hay you'll give spam a big black eye put it in the hospital for a while and drain your FUD department of all resorces.
Now how can the Linux community help Microsoft on this. I think with a little more effort Spam won't be going to the hospital but the morge...
Muahahaha
My head's gonna explode (Score:3, Funny)
Spammers: BOO!
Suing Spammers: YAY!
MicroSoft sues Spammers: BOO!--no YAY!--no BOO!--no ka-poW!!
I'm so confused...
Re:all the money in the world (Score:2)
The reason for the law to sue spammers is if the spam is deceptive.
If the spam is deceptive is irrelevant to the isp, which is the one suing.
This should be an end user issue, that the end users get the profits from.
Re:all the money in the world (Score:2, Informative)
Re:all the money in the world (Score:2)
So the effect, which is targeted at the customer, is deemed less important?
Okay. Fine. Then why does it matter what the content of the spam is?
The content should only come into case if we are considering the customer, which we are not. Just the deceptive business practices.
And the expense may be the of ISP, but I pay for my use of that expense. I think th
Re:all the money in the world (Score:3, Interesting)
The above link also states that more than half of U.S. currency is in circulation *outside* of the U.S., so there's less than $330 billion in circulation within our country. Amazing isn't it? No, that doesn't mean that Bill Gates has 20% of the nation's wealth. It just demonstrates how money is created [zezenetwork.com]
Re:all the money in the world (Score:3, Insightful)
Slashdot Club (Score:3, Funny)
The second rule of Slashdot Club: never side with Microsoft.
Re:Slashdot Club (Score:2, Funny)
Oh wait, sorry, I read the first line twice, silly me.
The second rule of Slashdot Club: no smoking in the hallways, please go outside.
Third rule of Slashdot Club: no littering, use the bins provided.
Fourth rule of Slashdot Club......
Microsoft is bad, mmkay? (Score:3, Interesting)
NO! (Score:2)
It does not cost Microsoft $500 dollars per spam message. Deceptibility has no variance in the ammount.
This is for being deceptive, and goes to the ones being decieved.
This is not for the Bandwidth Microsoft uses. Therefore they should recieve NOTHING!
Re:NO! (Score:2)
Re:When Evil pretends to fight against Evil (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not so straightforward as you think:
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business
What do you mean, save bandwidth? (Score:2, Informative)
You just shift the data over to other servers, who may or may not be able to handle the load better.
Re:Ok, Whatever (Score:3, Informative)
My hotmail username has a number & a special character in it. It has never recieved any spam in the 5 years that I have been using it.
Re:Only result can be... (Score:3, Informative)
The only solution is to make it unprofitable. I suggest planting whatever program Sen. Hatch plans on using for destroying computers into all the adware on the internet, I'm guessing the people who download that are the same people who actually buy stuff from spam.
Ahh.... No. I help lots of my friends unfsck their computers from things like adware and viruses, and I have noticed that the majority of people who end up with adware on their computers (all intelligent college students) end up with it for t
Re:What about MS (Score:5, Informative)
Spammers fake the sender's address all the time. If you dug into the mail header details I'm willing to bet they didn't come from Hotmail servers.
Try typing this in exactly as shown:
telnet your.smtp.server 25
HELO somedomain.com
MAIL FROM:
RCPT TO:
DATA
Subject: junk subject line
junk body text
.
The blank line after the subject and the dot on the line by itself are important.
Congratulations - you've just sent yourself a forged e-mail. Easy wasn't it?