Microsoft Sues Spammers 304
mclearn writes "Microsoft has filed seven more lawsuits against spammers, this time targeting those who violate the 'brown-paper wrapper' provision of the CAN-SPAM law, which sets rules for sexually oriented e-mail solicitations.
Apparently these are a small part of over 120 spam-related cases Microsoft is currently litigating. With Microsoft's deep pockets, can they effectively send a resounding message to spammers?"
How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:5, Funny)
Now, hear me out. Microsoft can become the exclusive spammer of Hotmail, and then they can strong arm other ISPs and mail providers into only accepting Microsoft(tm) Spam. Once this is done, they can quickly buy up the other spammers that haven't gone under. Finally, once this is accomplished and they're the only spammer left, they can quietly shut down the operation. Tada, spam is over.
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:5, Funny)
That will never happen. Open source spam will start up the competition again.
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:2, Funny)
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:3, Informative)
Just to give some historical context for those who might eventually not remember.
In 1959 Cold War tensions eased a little. The new Soviet leader, Nikita Khruschchev, visited Dwight Eisenhower at his holiday home near Washington. The meeting was very friendly. But the next year, relations got worse again. An American military plane was shot down over the Soviet Union. Eisenhower admitted that such planes had been
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:2)
Apparently, the story is true, but the picture you have seen is forged. Noone was there to take a picture, but someone constructed a picture afterwards.
I've also seen some claims that the shoe incident never happened.
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:3, Funny)
Ok, do we hate Microsoft or like them now?????
Re:How Microsoft can end Spam (Score:2)
Perhaps it's time to open another "free!" AOL account?
Message? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah... Don't spam XXX material... just the regular garbage... Anyone who thinks this is going to make much difference, is either nieve or stupid - possibly both.
Amazed! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Amazed! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Amazed! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Amazed! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Amazed! (Score:2)
Or are you taking of MS own internal email system ?
Or maybe they just figured out the most machiavelic business plan ever:
1. sell thousands of hotmail accounts to spammers
2. profit !
3. sue spammers because they cost them money
4. profit !
5. goto 1
6. ???
Re:Amazed! (Score:2, Interesting)
Speaking of which, here's an interesting tidbit [eh.net]:
Makes Me Wonder (Score:3, Interesting)
Surely, the amount of money they spend doing this outweighs the "brownie points" they'll be winning.
And, why wouldn't they just focus on writing anti-spam filtering software, and then _sell_ it as a solution to the spam problem? (In that light, shouldn't they be _encouraging_ more spammers so that they can sell more anti-spam software, or perhaps better convince people to switch to an "enhanced" Outlook 200x?)
Re:Makes Me Wonder (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Makes Me Wonder (Score:5, Interesting)
One reason is that if they don't stop the spam from zombie windows boxes, they can get sued by others for engineering negligence combined with innocent third party issues. At this point they have no option but to show they are doing their best to go after the spamers and deal with a technical solution or else they are going to end up on the wrong end of a class action suit.
The case to sue MS for the spam issue is getting stronger every day and one of these days they are going to wish they had done something sooner.
Once the spam zombies are gone, the stupid hosters will be a much easier problem.
What are the punishments? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Makes Me Wonder (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Makes Me Wonder (Score:2)
It is not just "brownie points". I presume that lots of home users find spam sufficiently annoying / offensive that they stop using email. Many of these will stop using the internet or even home computers. This translates to fewer people buying replacement home computers, and hence fewer people paying for new Microsoft licenses.
Pulling some numbers out of the air, (say) 1% of (say) 500 million computer
Re:Makes Me Wonder (Score:2, Informative)
hotmail
yahoo
consultant.com
mail.com
This is purely because they seem to be the most common email addresses for spammers and scammers.
Of course they can... (Score:2)
Anything can happen when you're rich. You can be president, the head of an national power company, or even the supposed 'good guy' in the fight against Internet freedom from solicitation.
Small dent in Hotmail Viagra Sales... (Score:5, Interesting)
Are there any published studies about how much spam could be reduced if Microsoft could place more effective anti-spam features into the OS itself
Don't get me wrong, I think this is a great step forward, but I think (supposing spammers aren't a little more intimidated) that we might see a better reduction in spam if better precautions were to be taken. Sorry if I've missed any big features mixed in with Windows that might help with this, I don't pay much attention to the patching that goes in as far as email is concerned.
Ryan
Re:Small dent in Hotmail Viagra Sales... (Score:3, Interesting)
I certainly wouldn't want spam features built into the OS. Isn't the reason why we all hate microsoft that they put too much stuff into their os?
Thunderbird does an ok job of filtering spam for me, although I'm very careful about where my email adress goes.
the biggest thing that could help stop spam is if no one bought anything. sapm costs basicly nothing to se
Re:Small dent in Hotmail Viagra Sales... (Score:2)
Spam, viruses etc are a very fluid problem, defences have to adapt and change quickly. The OS is (should be?) too stable/slow-moving to be able to adapt quickly enough.
Re:Small dent in Hotmail Viagra Sales... (Score:3)
YMMV, but for me their spam filter works just fine. Are you... signing up for these viagara letters? Sometimes we all need a little boost... well, not us... you.
I don't believe it! (Score:5, Funny)
let's see... Red Sox won World Series as well.
Well, the apocalypse is on it's way... better start repenting and whatnot.
Re:I don't believe it! (Score:2, Funny)
Australians should know what I mean.
Re:I don't believe it! (Score:2)
As a die hard Red Sox fan I can say the apocalypse is not coming just yet. In fact, it looks like we've narrowly averted the apocalypse by missing out on a Chicago Cubs/ Boston Red Sox World Series last year. Now that the Red Sox have won a World Series and ended their 86 year drought, it looks like they can't trigger an apocalypse for at least another 86 years.
Explain again.... (Score:2)
Well, do you want the short answer or the long answer.
No.
I guess that was both.
Hooray! Go Microsoft! (Score:5, Funny)
I bet I know why.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I bet I know why.. (Score:5, Funny)
"Do I want mail-order brides from Russia? Why... why yes... I do. I'm sure Stevey B wouldn't mind one as well under the tree on Christmas morning!"
*clicks to order, moves onto next message*
"What... What? Is this one implying I need pills to compensate for my small penis? Do you really think, doug35651@aol.com, that I would be ordering mail order brides if I couldn't pleasure them? I don't need pills to compensate -- my deep pockets and my corporate empire keep me secure enough! Doug, you shall rue the day you trifled with Mister Gates!"
*buzzes intercom, calls legal team, sets plan in motion*
Re:I bet I know why.. (Score:2)
Re:I bet I know why.. (Score:3, Funny)
Meanwhile in an undisclosed location Mr. Black Hat Logs onto his botnet, and notices one of his open cable modem spam relays is down. "Guess another luser got what was coming to them, time to rename the
Buying Microsoft Office XP for only $89? (Score:3, Funny)
The spammers will just move overseas (Score:5, Insightful)
Given that, I have moral objections to spammers and am pleased each time I hear of one getting what he or she deserves.
Re:The spammers will just move overseas (Score:4, Interesting)
You know, you just illustrate the problem (Score:4, Insightful)
E.g., when I wrote that walkthrough of mine and put my real email address in it (again, spam was not yet a problem), it never occured to me that I'd ever want to discriminate against, say, gamers from Korea if they have questions.
E.g., when I posted on newsgroups, I actually expected that some people would answer privately per email. No point in dragging the whole thread off-topic, after all. Some of them were, yes, in other countries. If I was talking about Linux or about 3D programming in assembly, I wasn't going to reject potentially valuable information from someone just because their email info is from Elbonia.
The fact that nowadays email addresses are some jealously guarded family secret, and that we're gladly blocking whole countries or continents, is the effect of spam that I hate the most. It just shows the extent of the damage these fucks have done to this public resource.
So, well, in fact I actually aggree to your point of view. Let them flee if they want to. Then we can block just the countries which still encourage them, and maybe reclaim our communication resource to the rest of them. Having a usable communication channel even to just half the world, is better than what we have today.
Re:The spammers will just move overseas (Score:5, Insightful)
Currently, the bulk of the big spammers [spamhaus.org] live and operate within the United States. They may host their Web sites in China, buy lists of open proxies from Romania, and commission viruses from Russian Mafia programmers -- but they live in the "comfort" of the U.S. whose laws they flout.
They do not want to move overseas. They want the comforts of home -- to make millions without leaving the couch. They are small-minded, hurtful, nasty little people. They want the world delivered to their door, and are willing to steal and destroy to get it -- but only if they can do that stealing and destroying from behind a screen. They are not brave. When they are challenged, they retreat into paranoia and lash out with lawsuits based on conspiracy theories. [slashdot.org] Can't do that from East Bumfuckistan.
Re:The spammers will just move overseas (Score:3, Insightful)
I would love if they'd just exclude addresses that are really not gonna bring them any business. Now tell me why would you try to sell viagra to anybody at mff.cuni.cz domain. Its math and physics department for gods sake!
I'm confused... (Score:2)
Re:I'm confused... (Score:2)
And whats even funnier is when I hit reply slashdot told me "This exact comment has already been posted. Try to be more original...".
No. (Score:3, Interesting)
If two people you really don't like kill each other, you can still hate them even though they both did you a favor.
Re:I'm confused... (Score:2)
Where are the IP lawyers when you need one? (Score:2, Funny)
But what about the harmful stuff? (Score:5, Interesting)
But what I wonder, is why isn't Moft going after the spyware and all that put stuff on your machine that, if you remove it, it makes your machine act funky? Isn't that damaging their product, IE?, or sometimes even Windblows itself is messed up.
Spam is a nuisance, but the adware and spyware are, imho, what are the biggest threat to people's computers. Of course, far be it from me to complain, because I make a liiiiittle on the side cleaning up machines over and over and over a freaking gain, but really, I think Moft should go out and start nailing some of these folks hard.
(btw, Moft means Microsoft)
That's my two cents, I expect no one to pay any attention to it, lol.
No, MS sues John Doe (Score:2)
Notice they're only suing pornographers. As if that's the only annoying spam.
I get spammed regularly to sign up for Microsoft's certification classes. I know that because it goes in my 'caughtspam' folder, whereupon I delete it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it won't be the deth bell or anything (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all about making it less attractive. It will always be attractive to some, even if thepbenalty is death by anal probe. However the numbers CAN be reduced by things like this.
Up till receantly, all it took to be a spammer was a total lack of ethics. There was basically no risk. You wouldn't get sued, and there was no law against it. Combine that with the returns, you had a lot of people lining up.
Well now there IS a risk. You can get your sued to the point of losing everything, and locked up in jail for a good long time. Also the returns will continue to get worse as more and more gets blocked.
We can never expcet to get rid of spam completely, but with effort we can curtail it. It's not like drugs where people demand it, actively seek it out, and will pay massive amount of money for it. Most people, even those that buy from it, don't want to get it. Thus all you really need to do is make it unattractive to people and most of it will die off.
Re:Well it won't be the deth bell or anything (Score:2)
You can get your sued?
I think I speak for all the grammar nazis out there when I say that there's no such thing as an implicit ass in a sentence. That's Latin you're thinking of. Remember, English is a Germanic language. If you want to say ass, you pretty much have to just say it.
[/parody]
Re:Well it won't be the deth bell or anything (Score:2)
Well that's NOT the case. Many people have trouble saying no to this shit. They know it, but can't do anything about it. So when something like the DNC comes, it's great
Everyone come down a little bit... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not saying not to hold a little suspicion - they are Microsoft, but then again, don't discount them just because they are Microsoft. Instead of trying to make better anti-spam software (which they are also doing), they are throwing a lot of money at the root of the cause, both in Congressional lobbying and these suits. Doesn't seem too bad to me.
Aaron
Re:Everyone come down a little bit... (Score:2)
What would be very impressive would be if the SEC found secret donations to worthy charities but somehow I don't think we'll be seeing that.
Re:Everyone come down a little bit... (Score:2)
The root cause of SPAM are naive, uneducated users.
[insert-your-favourite-MEGACORP] has _never_ done anything to educate potential customers, it makes lying^H^H^H^H^H^Hmarketing more difficult.
Re:Everyone come down a little bit... (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a HUGE difference between Microsoft and Bill Gates. Bill Gates has plenty of money, and doesn't need to make more. I highly doubt his sole purpose in life is to make money.
Microsoft IS NOT Bill Gates. Microsoft exists for one reason only. To make money. There IS some reason that involves money behind this. They don't do things for altruistic purposes. You ever seen a Microsoft donate su
Re:Everyone come down a little bit... (Score:3, Interesting)
Before we proceed, let me make the point that I agree with this statement completely. Of course, it could be applied to any corporation as well.
You ever seen a Microsoft donate sums of money and not see it prominently advertised?
That said, this is a pretty feeble argument. Suppose, for a moment, that Microsoft only publicizes 50% of the donations it makes. The other half it funnels down to worthy charities in amounts small enough and/or channels obscure
Re:Everyone come down a little bit... (Score:2)
That is what companies *do*.
Does this make it any less of donation? Or help the needy more?
whatever it takes I guess (Score:2)
Increased space (Score:2, Funny)
This will work brilliantly! (Score:2)
It might even work as well as the lawsuits against filesharers.
In all seriousness, if the passage of the law changed nothing, likely the lawsuits will only stop those targeted, and ten will spring up to replace the one that got nailed. They also can do next to nothing about spammers outside the US. So, while I have to give a (rare) salute to Microsoft on this one, I don't think it'll do much to stem the flood.
I feel odd (Score:2)
Microsoft is the good guy?
Hummmm must be a full moon...
Screw spam, let them take on spyware/malware! (Score:2, Insightful)
Spam's got nothing on spyware.
At the very least, (Score:2)
I'm sure it will put a damper on things. When AOL, Earthlink and MS sue spammers, it must have an effect, but spam will only stop once Cisco sells spam filtering routers that will drop all spam packets on the floor.
Re:At the very least, (Score:2)
I even tarpit the spammy fucks.
http://mail.btfh.net/spam.txt
http://mail.btfh
Today's MS Friend-o-meter reading (Score:5, Funny)
Self-serving Distraction Generator (Score:3, Interesting)
Curious, but the invective hurled against Microsoft by average non-geek folks certainly has exploded recently: Seems even grandmas understand Microsoft sold them a pretty bag full of moths, metaphorically speaking.
This could make for an interesting ending of the Microsoft con: The greedy, gluttonous dragon devours its own heart and falls over dead.
Add your own happily-ever-after line here.
Like all things... (Score:3, Interesting)
...making them illegal doesn't necessarily mean people will stop doing them.
If you make spam illegal and prosecute the people sending it, you basically force businesses who respect the law out of the market, and what remains are the businesses with no respect for the law: organized criminals
The mob's next frontier is spam, and spam's next frontier is the mob. I don't think this is an improvement.
I thought that CAN-SPAM... (Score:2)
Or is this right now just limited to Corporations?
...I must have missed how this was different from Fascism
Microsoft could end spam tomorrow (Score:3, Insightful)
But Microsoft don't share, I don't buy this bull about how MS is trying to end spam. It would take 2 of their engineers and one week to set up a very effective blocklist just based on the garbage being thrown at hotmail all the time. Then the world would know about virtually all spam sources.
Microsoft's True Motive (Score:3, Funny)
A whole new meaning to "embrace and extend".
The facilitate spam (Score:3, Interesting)
Next time you receive one of these ("you have won a big price in the lottery") check the domain name you are supposed to send mail to. Usually some variation on "cashchangeukltd.com".
Do a whois on it. In 99% of cases, it has been registered by Microsoft!
The "technical contact" is an address that only sends an auto-reply tellig you another address (pdbeta@microsoft.com). That one is linked to
When you send a mail to the mentioned cashchange address, it usually returns after a few days with some "mailbox overflow" or "could not contact mailserver" reply *FROM HOTMAIL*.
So, Microsoft are fully in the position to do something with this. Yet, they ignore all abuse mail about this topic.
Go get them MS! (Score:2)
I hope so. My penis is now 20 m long, I have about fifty Rolexes and don't get me started about the amount of MS software I have crammed in my closets!
License revisions (Score:2)
Sure, this might move the spammer off Windows when caught, but configuring a Linux type system would be beyonf the capabilities of some spammers.
In Redmond... (Score:3, Insightful)
( ) technical (x) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which vary from state to state.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
(x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
(x) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires cooperation from too many of your friends and is counterintuitive
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever worked
( ) Other:
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
(x) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(x) Asshats
(x) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
(x) Technically illiterate politicians
(x) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
( ) Other:
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures cannot involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures cannot involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
(x) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
( ) Other:
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Nice try, dude, but I don't think it will work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
In Redmond only old people sue spammers.
Now if only... (Score:2)
Re:FP? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:FP? (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you kidding? I'm sure there is a huge benefit to them in the cost of running Hotmail. Hotmail accounts would be send millions of spam a day.
I don't know who to root for! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I don't know who to root for! (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft has such an ungodly amount of money already that you might as well root for them, since nothing they win is likely to have much of a material impact on who they are or what they do. MS winning a million dollars in court is like you finding a $10 bill on the sidewalk - it might perk up your morning a bit, but it's not going to change your life. Spammers paying out millions, though - that'll wreck your whole day if you're in the spam business...
Re:I don't know who to root for! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I don't know who to root for! (Score:2)
WHY it won't work (Score:3, Insightful)
These 120 spammers represent a very small section of the entire spammer population, and I doubt that they've got big guys like Ralsky on it. You won't see M$ getting anywhere near the spam gangs, either. In fact, when you think about it, M$ is the reason some spam gangs even exist! Think about all the security holes in XP that allow it to be hijacked and used as a spam relay. Also, think about the "open-relay-by-default" nature of some
Re:I've had it (Score:5, Interesting)
People dont mind rapists and murderes getting away
Let's assume you're correct in saying it only takes 2 seconds per message, although I think it takes a bit more.
If we assume 1 million copies of the message are sent out and reach someone's inbox, that's 2000000 seconds, or about 555.5 hours, collectively taken by that spammer.
If we assume that all these people were making a mere $8 an hour, that's now $4444.00 that spammer has cost.
That's not very realistic, though. Let's assume that 5 million messages found their way into some inboxes, and all the people were paid $25/hour and it took them 5 seconds to delete.
5000000*5/60/60*25 == $173611.12
Now, with about 100 messages a day finding their way into the average inbox (wild guess), that's $17,361,112.00 it has cost.
Still think it's a minor inconvenience?
"I understand you get lots of spam from different sources
So because Hitler killed a shit-load of jews (yes I know, some law about the longer a usenet thread continues, the more likely a comparison to Hitler & Nazis is...) and was never punished for it (he killed himself before anyone else got to him), we should let other people attempt to kill off a race without punishing them as long as they kill themselves once they're done?
Come on, that's just weak.
ND
Re:I've had it (Score:3)
All you losers .. WHO CARES ABOUT SPAM?
People's civil liberties and not suffering from anti-spam laws (maybe other things, but that
Re:BOOOO Microsoft! (Score:2)
Re:BOOOO Microsoft! (Score:3)
Because the right to Free Speech (in the US) specifically protects political speech. The KKK, as horrible as it is, is engaging in political dialogue, and it's important for the proper functioning of democracy that political dialogue be protected. And, in particular, it's only unpopular political speech requires active protection.
Spammers, on the other hand, are
Re:BOOOO Microsoft! (Score:2)
Re:BOOOO Microsoft! (Score:2, Informative)
Suppose a KKK rally group walked in your front door and "demonstrated" in your living room. Freedom of speech certainly doesn't protect the action of trespassing.
The root of the difference is that the KKK demonstration is held in a public place. You can go home to get away from it. Spammers send spam to your email account. Your particular email address/server/ISP, e
Harrassment isn't free speech (Score:4, Insightful)
But they're not allowed to come into people's houses and harrass them. Not if they don't want to be charged with trespassing and breaking & entering--and that's assuming the house owner's shotgun doesn't do them in first (assuming the state has sane home defence laws). That's the difference.
Re:Harrassment isn't free speech (Score:2, Flamebait)
US - probably the only country where the right to shoot someone who comes into your house is considered sane
Re:BOOOO Microsoft! (Score:2)
You have the right to speak. You don't have the right to force me to listen, and make me pay for the priveledge of doing so.
Re:BOOOO Microsoft! (Score:2)
And in this case, the perpetrator can be prosecuted for trespass (and probably arson). That's when their actions have crossed the line from protected, political speech into an invasion of privacy and a dangerous act.
Re:MS should filter outgoing spam from Hotmail fir (Score:2)
Re:too confusing (Score:2)
Re:Finally (Score:2)
There remains the problem of a company deliberately commissioning spam to cause problems to a competitor, but I think that playing field would level its
Re:I guess lawyers work cheaper than programmers (Score:3, Informative)
This would be easy to test. If your mail server runs OpenBSD or Linux, use passive OS fingerprinting [w4g.org], also ported to netfilter [netfilter.org], to scrutinize mail coming from windows boxes. Then see how much legit mail you receive from Windows hosts.