You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com> on 2006/05/13 03:37:29 UTC
Suing Spammers
So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously considering
it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it and I do front
end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm wondering, is there any
reason why I should not sue spammers if I can do it? I'm wondering if I
make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for free
just to get the spam to sue for.
Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>.
jdow wrote:
> From: "Marc Perkel" <ma...@perkel.com>
>>
>> jdow wrote:
>>> Well, Marc would have a really hard time proving HE was injured by the
>>> spam. Therefore seeing would be annoyingly unproductive for HIM. But
>>> the ISPs forced to hire him could sue and win. (Collecting might be
>>> quite another kettle of French fried worms.)
>>>
>>>
>> I don't have to prove injury. Statutory damages are $25/message.
>
> In a role as private party recipient this is true. But in the role
> of a spam filtering service provider the spam messages are your food
> not your nemesis.
>
> {^_^}
>
According to the lawyer I can get the statutory damages. If it's
actually true I could give my spam filtering services away for free and
just make a living off the lawsuits.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>.
From: "Marc Perkel" <ma...@perkel.com>
>
> jdow wrote:
>> Well, Marc would have a really hard time proving HE was injured by the
>> spam. Therefore seeing would be annoyingly unproductive for HIM. But
>> the ISPs forced to hire him could sue and win. (Collecting might be
>> quite another kettle of French fried worms.)
>>
>>
> I don't have to prove injury. Statutory damages are $25/message.
In a role as private party recipient this is true. But in the role
of a spam filtering service provider the spam messages are your food
not your nemesis.
{^_^}
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>.
jdow wrote:
> Well, Marc would have a really hard time proving HE was injured by the
> spam. Therefore seeing would be annoyingly unproductive for HIM. But
> the ISPs forced to hire him could sue and win. (Collecting might be
> quite another kettle of French fried worms.)
>
>
I don't have to prove injury. Statutory damages are $25/message.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>.
Well, Marc would have a really hard time proving HE was injured by the
spam. Therefore seeing would be annoyingly unproductive for HIM. But
the ISPs forced to hire him could sue and win. (Collecting might be
quite another kettle of French fried worms.)
{^_^}
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rudd" <jr...@ucsc.edu>
To: "Marc Perkel" <ma...@perkel.com>
Cc: "SpamAssassin Users" <us...@spamassassin.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 18:51
Subject: Re: Suing Spammers
> If it works, let me know ... and let me know the name of your lawyer :-)
>
> Cuz, I'd jump on that bandwagon in a heart beat...
>
>
>
> On May 12, 2006, at 18:37, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>> So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously
>> considering it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it
>> and I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm
>> wondering, is there any reason why I should not sue spammers if I can
>> do it? I'm wondering if I make enough money suing spammers I could
>> give my services away for free just to get the spam to sue for.
>>
>> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>>
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by John Rudd <jr...@ucsc.edu>.
If it works, let me know ... and let me know the name of your lawyer :-)
Cuz, I'd jump on that bandwagon in a heart beat...
On May 12, 2006, at 18:37, Marc Perkel wrote:
> So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously
> considering it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it
> and I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm
> wondering, is there any reason why I should not sue spammers if I can
> do it? I'm wondering if I make enough money suing spammers I could
> give my services away for free just to get the spam to sue for.
>
> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>.
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
> One gets the idea that many in this thread have had little experience
> of litigation. I don't know about the US, but in the UK, you're
> talking *many* months and much paperwork. That being said. I'm so up
> for suing the SOB's ... hit em where it hurts.
>
> A small addendum, once a private prosecution is achieved, a criminal
> one (with perhaps damages) should be easier. Any EU lawyers got an
> opinion on this?
>
> I'm taking 5 - 20k a day spam - I would dearly love to recoup my
> time/money.
>
>
You're right. The lawyer I'm thinking about working with specializes in
this sort of thing. So I think he has it down to a formula. The idea if
it works out is that I have the spam and he has the legal expertise and
we split the take. I'm somewhat legal savvy myself so I can comprehend
what to look for to find the right people to go after.
Re: Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Nigel Frankcom <ni...@blue-canoe.net>.
One gets the idea that many in this thread have had little experience
of litigation. I don't know about the US, but in the UK, you're
talking *many* months and much paperwork. That being said. I'm so up
for suing the SOB's ... hit em where it hurts.
A small addendum, once a private prosecution is achieved, a criminal
one (with perhaps damages) should be easier. Any EU lawyers got an
opinion on this?
I'm taking 5 - 20k a day spam - I would dearly love to recoup my
time/money.
KR
Nigel
On Sun, 14 May 2006 09:35:37 -0700, Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>
wrote:
>
>
>Scott Warren wrote:
>> You ask this like you know who the spammers are and where to find
>> them. If this is the case and spammers are that easy to find, why are
>> we not reading more articles like the one where a spammer in the
>> former Soviet Republic was found beaten to death in his apartment??
>>
>> Sure, sue them if you can, but I get the feeling that those drone
>> computers over seas sending out the spam might not show up in court.
>>
>> -- Scott
>> My 2 cents on spam: www.knyght.net/badspam.htm
>>
>I'm not looking to take on the soviet mafia I'm looking for US based
>spamers who are clearly breaking the law and who can be found and sued.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>.
Scott Warren wrote:
> You ask this like you know who the spammers are and where to find
> them. If this is the case and spammers are that easy to find, why are
> we not reading more articles like the one where a spammer in the
> former Soviet Republic was found beaten to death in his apartment??
>
> Sure, sue them if you can, but I get the feeling that those drone
> computers over seas sending out the spam might not show up in court.
>
> -- Scott
> My 2 cents on spam: www.knyght.net/badspam.htm
>
I'm not looking to take on the soviet mafia I'm looking for US based
spamers who are clearly breaking the law and who can be found and sued.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Scott Warren <sw...@shelton.org>.
You ask this like you know who the spammers are and where to find
them. If this is the case and spammers are that easy to find, why
are we not reading more articles like the one where a spammer in the
former Soviet Republic was found beaten to death in his apartment??
Sure, sue them if you can, but I get the feeling that those drone
computers over seas sending out the spam might not show up in court.
-- Scott
My 2 cents on spam: www.knyght.net/badspam.htm
On May 12, 2006, at 8:37 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
> So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously
> considering it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in
> it and I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm
> wondering, is there any reason why I should not sue spammers if I
> can do it? I'm wondering if I make enough money suing spammers I
> could give my services away for free just to get the spam to sue for.
>
> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>
>
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>.
Rick Measham wrote:
> Marc Perkel wrote:
>> ... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
> > ... I'm wondering if I
>> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
>> free just to get the spam to sue for.
>>
>> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>
> To be completely cynical, you're nuts.
>
> If you're in the spam-fighting business then the last thing you want
> to do is actually stop spammers from trying. Once the spammers stop,
> you're out of business :)
>
>
Quite frankly, I could live with that.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>.
jdow wrote:
> From: "Marc Perkel" <ma...@perkel.com>
>>
>> mouss wrote:
>>> Rick Measham wrote:
>>>> Marc Perkel wrote:
>>>>> ... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
>>>> > ... I'm wondering if I
>>>>> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
>>>>> free just to get the spam to sue for.
>>>>>
>>>>> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>>>>
>>>> To be completely cynical, you're nuts.
>>>>
>>>> If you're in the spam-fighting business then the last thing you
>>>> want to do is actually stop spammers from trying. Once the spammers
>>>> stop, you're out of business :)
>>> This is silly, because it ignores time. he is not trying to get an
>>> eternal business. he wants a business _now_. and spam isn't to stop
>>> tomorrow. if he can get few of them, then I'll congratulate him.
>>> even if few is too few.
>>>
>>> That said, I can only say him "good luck". if he has ideas that can
>>> apply in .fr, then I'd be happy to hear about.
>>
>> Here's what I have in mind. I'm hooking up with a lawyer who
>> specializes in this sort of thing. I provide him the evidence and the
>> companies to go after and he sues them and we split the take 50/50.
>> If it's profitable, and it looks like it might be more profitable
>> that what I'm charging my customers, then I can make money off the
>> lawsuits and give the spam filtering service away for free.
>
> Marc, I am cynical enough and distrust lawyers, who have to receive
> an ethics-ectomy to pass the bar, enough that I am strongly inclined
> to suspect this is a lawyerly based advanced fee scam. If he asks you
> for ANYTHING up front, even a peanut whistle, set him up with the FBI.
> (Approach the FBI about the suspected scam and help them nail the
> sucker if he really is preying on anti-spam folks.)
>
> {^_^}
>
No - I don't trust lawyers either. We are working it on a percetage
basis. I supply the spam, he sues, and we split the take.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>.
From: "Marc Perkel" <ma...@perkel.com>
>
> mouss wrote:
>> Rick Measham wrote:
>>> Marc Perkel wrote:
>>>> ... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
>>> > ... I'm wondering if I
>>>> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
>>>> free just to get the spam to sue for.
>>>>
>>>> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>>>
>>> To be completely cynical, you're nuts.
>>>
>>> If you're in the spam-fighting business then the last thing you want
>>> to do is actually stop spammers from trying. Once the spammers stop,
>>> you're out of business :)
>> This is silly, because it ignores time. he is not trying to get an
>> eternal business. he wants a business _now_. and spam isn't to stop
>> tomorrow. if he can get few of them, then I'll congratulate him. even
>> if few is too few.
>>
>> That said, I can only say him "good luck". if he has ideas that can
>> apply in .fr, then I'd be happy to hear about.
>
> Here's what I have in mind. I'm hooking up with a lawyer who specializes
> in this sort of thing. I provide him the evidence and the companies to
> go after and he sues them and we split the take 50/50. If it's
> profitable, and it looks like it might be more profitable that what I'm
> charging my customers, then I can make money off the lawsuits and give
> the spam filtering service away for free.
Marc, I am cynical enough and distrust lawyers, who have to receive
an ethics-ectomy to pass the bar, enough that I am strongly inclined
to suspect this is a lawyerly based advanced fee scam. If he asks you
for ANYTHING up front, even a peanut whistle, set him up with the FBI.
(Approach the FBI about the suspected scam and help them nail the
sucker if he really is preying on anti-spam folks.)
{^_^}
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Marc Perkel <ma...@perkel.com>.
mouss wrote:
> Rick Measham wrote:
>> Marc Perkel wrote:
>>> ... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
>> > ... I'm wondering if I
>>> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
>>> free just to get the spam to sue for.
>>>
>>> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>>
>> To be completely cynical, you're nuts.
>>
>> If you're in the spam-fighting business then the last thing you want
>> to do is actually stop spammers from trying. Once the spammers stop,
>> you're out of business :)
> This is silly, because it ignores time. he is not trying to get an
> eternal business. he wants a business _now_. and spam isn't to stop
> tomorrow. if he can get few of them, then I'll congratulate him. even
> if few is too few.
>
> That said, I can only say him "good luck". if he has ideas that can
> apply in .fr, then I'd be happy to hear about.
Here's what I have in mind. I'm hooking up with a lawyer who specializes
in this sort of thing. I provide him the evidence and the companies to
go after and he sues them and we split the take 50/50. If it's
profitable, and it looks like it might be more profitable that what I'm
charging my customers, then I can make money off the lawsuits and give
the spam filtering service away for free.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by mouss <us...@free.fr>.
Rick Measham wrote:
> Marc Perkel wrote:
>> ... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
> > ... I'm wondering if I
>> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
>> free just to get the spam to sue for.
>>
>> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>
> To be completely cynical, you're nuts.
>
> If you're in the spam-fighting business then the last thing you want
> to do is actually stop spammers from trying. Once the spammers stop,
> you're out of business :)
This is silly, because it ignores time. he is not trying to get an
eternal business. he wants a business _now_. and spam isn't to stop
tomorrow. if he can get few of them, then I'll congratulate him. even if
few is too few.
That said, I can only say him "good luck". if he has ideas that can
apply in .fr, then I'd be happy to hear about.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Rick Measham <ri...@measham.id.au>.
Marc Perkel wrote:
> ... I do front
> end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
> ... I'm wondering if I
> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for free
> just to get the spam to sue for.
>
> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
To be completely cynical, you're nuts.
If you're in the spam-fighting business then the last thing you want to
do is actually stop spammers from trying. Once the spammers stop, you're
out of business :)
Cynical Cheers!
Rick Measham
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by "Steven W. Orr" <st...@syslang.net>.
On Friday, May 12th 2006 at 18:37 -0700, quoth Marc Perkel:
=>So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously considering it. I
=>hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it and I do front end spam
=>filtering for about 500 domains. I'm wondering, is there any reason why I
=>should not sue spammers if I can do it? I'm wondering if I make enough money
=>suing spammers I could give my services away for free just to get the spam to
=>sue for.
=>
=>Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
=>
I have attended the annual spam conference at MIT. (You can probably
google it up.) One of the presentations was by a law firm that went after
a spammer in (God Help Him) Virginia where they actually have laws with
teeth. The customer was AOL who was suffering ~3M messages per day coming
from these guys. End story was that they ended up convicting these
bastards and one of them ended up with a 9 year sentence. Cool story.
--
Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have .0.
happened but none stranger than this. Does your driver's license say Organ ..0
Donor?Black holes are where God divided by zero. Listen to me! We are all- 000
individuals! What if this weren't a hypothetical question?
steveo at syslang.net
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by mouss <us...@free.fr>.
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Craig McLean wrote on Sat, 13 May 2006 14:18:31 +0100:
>
>
>> http://spamlegalaction.pbwiki.com/
>>
>> Rules in CA might be a little different, but the principle is likely to
>> be the same..
>>
>
> Just that you don't get hold of the "nasty" spammers. And the "nice"
> spammers are easily blocked.
>
I disagree. I have no way to block any kind of spammers without risking
false positives (I am exagerating here. I have very few negatives, and
since about 6 months, no false positives at all. spammers hearing the
list can decide to "punish" me, but I am ready for that war...). Anyway,
I find it easier to block "nasty" spam than "honest" spam.
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Kai Schaetzl <ma...@conactive.com>.
Craig McLean wrote on Sat, 13 May 2006 14:18:31 +0100:
> http://spamlegalaction.pbwiki.com/
>
> Rules in CA might be a little different, but the principle is likely to
> be the same..
Just that you don't get hold of the "nasty" spammers. And the "nice"
spammers are easily blocked.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>.
From: "Craig McLean" <cr...@fukka.co.uk>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Marc Perkel wrote:
>> So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously considering
>> it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it and I do front
>> end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm wondering, is there any
>> reason why I should not sue spammers if I can do it? I'm wondering if I
>> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for free
>> just to get the spam to sue for.
>>
>> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
>
> No, you're not nuts, at least not in the EU:
>
> http://spamlegalaction.pbwiki.com/
>
> Rules in CA might be a little different, but the principle is likely to
> be the same..
On another paw, Craig, do consider who is the injured party. Marc is
not. The final recipient, the addressee, is an injured party for the
spam in her mailbox. The addressee's ISP is also an injured party due
to the (vastly) increased mail volume her servers must handle. They
have a tort for filing suit. The person who filters the spam is, one
can argue, benefiting from the spam. So it is hard for him to sue
and win anything.
{^_^}
Re: Suing Spammers
Posted by Craig McLean <cr...@fukka.co.uk>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Marc Perkel wrote:
> So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously considering
> it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it and I do front
> end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm wondering, is there any
> reason why I should not sue spammers if I can do it? I'm wondering if I
> make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for free
> just to get the spam to sue for.
>
> Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
No, you're not nuts, at least not in the EU:
http://spamlegalaction.pbwiki.com/
Rules in CA might be a little different, but the principle is likely to
be the same..
C.
- --
Craig McLean http://fukka.co.uk
craig@fukka.co.uk Where the fun never starts
Powered by FreeBSD, and GIN!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEZdynMDDagS2VwJ4RAt/8AKDrS4OTa2cnHxQj362R/qEtqAY5mQCg2yIK
Afy//ujPOl25FBq2beUqtYQ=
=LqRl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----