|
| Posted by: Seattle Zen
- Donor [55343019] Thu, Aug 28, 2003, 21:13
I may have mentioned my friend Ben Livingston, who runs Hemp.net, a small ISP and website, has an affinity for suing spammers. He started with small potato cases in small claims court, but now has a real doosy.
Hitting spammers where it hurts
In a lawsuit filed this week in Seattle Federal Court, Ben Livingston is asking for nearly $1.5 million in damages against two companies he says are violating the state’s anti-spam laws.
Ben's suit is based on these WA statutes
Chapter 19.190 RCW: COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL
1) No person may initiate the transmission, conspire with another to initiate the transmission, or assist the transmission, of a commercial electronic mail message from a computer located in Washington or to an electronic mail address that the sender knows, or has reason to know, is held by a Washington resident that: (a) Uses a third party's internet domain name without permission of the third party, or otherwise misrepresents or obscures any information in identifying the point of origin or the transmission path of a commercial electronic mail message; or
(b) Contains false or misleading information in the subject line. Spam almost by definition comes from accounts that misrepresent or obscures identifying the point of origin. This allows it to avoid blocks end users put up after reading previous spam.
Ben's first big case is currently against a spammer in Colorado who is famous for sending "cannabis alternatives" spam that simply rub Ben the wrong way. The biggest hurdle in his suit against that clown is collecting on a judgment that is soon forthcoming. Ben assures me that the company he brought the $1.5 million suit against has something to lose.
Is there anyone out there who wants to defend spammers and argue that this is a poor use of our government's resources? Or will we in the future all raise a toast to Ben as one of the first warriors to lance Spammers into the dustbin of history? |
| | | 1 | Myboyjack Leader
ID: 14826271 Thu, Aug 28, 2003, 21:38
|
I thought about trying to argue that the 1st Amendment was somehow implicated - but just didn't have the stomach fot it. Plain and simple, spamming is an invasion of my privacy and I'm all for your bud (no pun intended)
|
|
| | | 2 | Madman Donor
ID: 398591212 Fri, Aug 29, 2003, 11:01
|
Yeah, if we're going to have a right to privacy, and that seems to be the case, then I want to exercise it for something that actually means something to me. Down with messages from xcgaquecgyq!!!! Go Ben Go!
|
|
| | | 3 | Madman Donor
ID: 398591212 Fri, Aug 29, 2003, 11:02
|
(BTW, that last message came from my heart, not my brain. That's a serious question -- whether it's a good use of gov't resources and don't have the brain to answer it at this point.)
|
|
| | | 4 | beastiemiked Sustainer
ID: 3531815 Fri, Aug 29, 2003, 12:03
|
Down with Spam! Not only is it annoying but ISP's have to jack up there prices because so much bandwidth deals with Spam.
|
|
| | | 5 | Myboyjack Leader
ID: 108231015 Fri, Aug 29, 2003, 12:09
|
if we're going to have a right to privacy, and that seems to be the case,
I'm not sure where you're coming from there, Madman. "seems the case"? We've had a common law "right to privacy" for basically ever that has nothing to do with governmental invasion of privacy zones. Seperate question than whether it's in the Constitution.
|
|
| | | 6 | Seattle Zen Donor
ID: 55343019 Tue, Jan 20, 2004, 21:03
|
My buddy Ben is getting more press, this time from Forbes.com
Now, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, Livingston and a small army of plaintiffs, attorneys and self-appointed activists have more license to go after businesses that send them junk faxes. In refusing during the week of January 12 to hear a case that claimed the 1991 federal ban on unsolicited faxes violates free-speech rights, the high court let stand a lower-court ruling involving a lawsuit filed by the state of Missouri against Fax.com. The suit accused Fax.com, once the largest fax blaster in the U.S., of illegally sending unsolicited ads to fax machines in the state.
But by declining to hear the lower court's case and allowing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 to stay intact, the court has effectively sanctioned an unintended consequence of the law that has ensnared many businesses in a legal web of fines, threats and a lot of aggravation.
|
|
| | | 7 | Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Tue, Jan 20, 2004, 23:32
|
I thot you guys were the sharing and caring kind. Where's my class action cut in this deal? 8]
|
|
| | | 8 | Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 00:32
|
Right now I'm spending half an hour at startup running anti-spyware, checking leaks, looking at every operation running on my computer. I then google every unfamiliar process running on my computer to see if it could be nasty.
I wasn't always this paranoid but after my son getting hacked recently and finding out 'he' made a purchase in France with his debit card we realize he has been the victim of a trojan keylogging attack.
He is even more paranoid. He is tracing every ping and tracking their origin and finding some amazing interest in whether any of his ports are protection-free.
I'm running McCaffee anti-virus, spybot, spysweeper, hijack this, etc and still found a new way Gator had found to autoload its programs on start. I recently switched to Mozilla Firebird in an effort to make me safer and will probably switch from Outlook Express when I get the ambition to do so.
It is just amazing the lengths a non-computer savy person has to go just to retain control of his own computer.
As I said in an earlier post on another thread, we even had our isp service cut off when spammers were using my son's computer. A good lesson to regularly update your anti-virus definitions.
More on keyloggers and trojans...look at what is available out there!
Here is a ridiculously easy user friendly trojan program it looks like even a novice could use to ruin your day.

I've even seen it with instructions and examples on how to maliciously use it like impersonating the victim and screwing with their online girlfriends in conversations etc.
Here are just some 'friendly' hacker enablers out there. Geeks Bearing Gifts
Another
I believe we are moving towards the day when even casual users will need to examine their computer with tools like this Click on the picture of the screenshot.
Any comments from you more computer savy operators besides, "duh...update yer definitions"?
|
|
| | | 9 | biliruben
ID: 5061711 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 02:03
|
I am about at your speed, or perhaps a bit slower, Baldwin. Recently went into overdrive trying to take back my computer. There are some nasty hijacking programs that it is impossible to remove. Just installed a new harddrive, new OS, am wiping my old one, and considering running linux on a dual boot off that. booting first off linux, since most of the nasties feast of XP. Also using firebird, contemplating going to a less popular email software, installed a firewall, checking for virus updates daily, and may even buy the spendy version of adaware.
Of course, I went to reinstall Office 2K SB after installing my new OS, and my CD's corrupt. That problem may cost me several hundred dollars, if I can't find a more "creative" solution.
Anyone have a CD they can lend me? I promise to use my legal key, not yours.
|
|
| | | 10 | Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 02:42
|
I also ran across a security expert at loggerheads with Microsoft over features of windows xp. He claims that xp has removed protections existing in previous versions that make your computer and it's ports a virtual hackers paradise. Sorry I can't tell you the site because I can't even find the history button on my brand spanking new Mozzilla Firebird browser yet. 8/
|
|
| | | 11 | biliruben
ID: 5061711 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 02:53
|
ctrl H
|
|
| | | 12 | Perm Dude Dude
ID: 30792616 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 08:06
|
I have Norton Systemworks (the whole package--firewall, antivirus, cleansweep, etc). Swear by it. Also have AdAware (excellent, easy to use and easy to keep updated spyware detector).
Had the same problem as your son, Baldwin before I got a copy of the newest AdAware program. Luckily my bank called me that day and refunded the small amount to my card, after issuing me a new debit card.
I find several port attempts every day (I'm on a DSL line), and at least one virus email attachment as well. Have to keep vigilent!
pd
|
|
| | | 13 | sarge33rd
ID: 350572011 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 09:41
|
speaking of viruses, trojans etc...just got in todays email, a mcafee warning ref W32/Bagle MM. Went to the mcafee site and ran their freescan.
mcafee
(located on the right hand side just beneath the "current threats" portion of the page.)
scanned some 34,000 files and found nothing. (For whiwch I am thankful). Run a constant AV from McAfee in the background on our pc's. So far, so good.
|
|
| | | 14 | Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 13:05
|
I was very impressed with Spybot when it was free [installed on a previous computer] and feel it is almost certainly the leader in anti-spyware [most complete up-to-date list] but I'm using free ad-aware atm. I'll probably end up paying for spybot.
|
|
| | | 15 | Perm Dude Dude
ID: 30792616 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 14:39
|
I like adaware because it's easy to update, and they appear to update the thing every few days (which means they are staying on top of things).
pd
|
|
| | | 16 | Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 21:18
|
Problem is I know for a fact there is common spyware ad-aware is missing. I have some media thingy making cookies on me and It didn't catch Gator's latest gimmick.
There is also a tracker embedded in Adobe Acrobat reader that I haven't figured out if I can delete without disabling acrobat. Ad-Aware doesn't stop it from spying one me, I can tell you that. Spybot at least gives me the option of deleting it.
|
|
| | | 17 | Perm Dude Dude
ID: 30792616 Wed, Jan 21, 2004, 22:04
|
I have spybot as well, though their lack of updates is troubling. I might use it once a month or so. Never hurts!
|
|
| | | 18 | biliruben
ID: 5061711 Thu, Jan 22, 2004, 11:25
|
Re 9:
Amazing! Despite getting the complete stiff-arm from Gateway, and explicit messages from Microsoft that they won't deal with EOM software, I picked up the phone and my dear Bill is sending me a new copy in the mail for the bargain price of $30 after shipping and tax, saving me hundreds (well, 20s if I bought a dubious used copy).
I didn't even have to prove it was mine, just that I had the original disk!
I promise to not speak badly of Mr. Gates for 1 week. Okay, 6 days.
|
|
| | | 19 | Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Thu, Jan 22, 2004, 13:59
|
An interesting program to check your computer for keylogging activity.
|
|
| | | 20 | biliruben
ID: 441182916 Thu, Jan 22, 2004, 14:03
|
Apparently, if I wanted to get a malicious executable onto Baldwin's computer, all I'd have to do is slap together a website purporting to offer some sort of protection/detection software. ;)
|
|
| | | 21 | Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Thu, Jan 22, 2004, 16:28
|
The awards...look at the awards!
Believe me I download with great deliberation, fear and trepidation. I just have to hope that my overlapping and redundant security measures are enuff to doublecheck each other. I already half believe Ad-aware has a deal with Gator but other systems have headed Gator off.
I also have a really cool small applet that notifies me before any program changes my settings. It has saved me from Msm messenger mischief.
Now to figure out why someone is trying to access my computer exactly every five minutes.
|
|
| | | 22 | Perm Dude Dude
ID: 30792616 Thu, Jan 22, 2004, 16:38
|
Know anyone with Asberger's Syndrome, by any chance?
|
|
| | | 23 | Seattle Zen
ID: 529121611 Fri, Mar 14, 2008, 18:27
|
Ben never made any money on his suit, oh well. I guess we'll have to hope there are more cases like this:
Spam King pleads guilty
Seattle's own Spam King, who used stolen e-mail addresses and "zombie" computers to send a deluge of spam, saw his reign come to an end Friday in U.S. District Court in Seattle. Robert Soloway pleaded guilty to three counts: fraud, e-mail fraud and failure to file an income tax return. He had faced 40 charges. He will be sentenced June 20. The maximum sentence on the fraud charge is 20 years, five years for e-mail fraud and one year for not filing an income tax return.
|
|
| | | 24 | Seattle Zen Leader
ID: 055343019 Sun, Jan 08, 2012, 23:56
|
Well, I think I may have found a VERY limited positive effect from spam. I just received two obvious spam e-mail from... a friend who died of cancer about six years ago. It brought a smile to my face seeing her name in the "From" line.
|
|
|
|