| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Therion Ware" |
| Date: |
09 Apr 2005 05:04:51 AM |
| Object: |
OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a
crime.
"It was not just sending bulk emails, he was falsifying the routing
information, disguising the origin," said prosecutor Lisa Hicks
Thomas.
"The end user couldn't say: don't send this to me," she added.
Ms Thomas said she was pleased with the ruling and hoped it would be
upheld.
'Never again'
Jaynes was operating though an America Online (AOL) server in Loudoun
County, where the world's largest Internet services provider is based,
and is believed to have sent some 10m unwanted emails a day.
Products advertised in his emails included a "Fed-Ex refund processor"
which he claimed would have allowed people to earn $75 an hour by
working from home.
Jaynes, who is from North Carolina, will appeal on the grounds that he
has been charged as an out-of-state resident under a Virginia law that
has only just come into effect.
His sentence is the harshest punishment handed down so far for junk
emailing in the US, and appears to be a strong signal that authorities
will not tolerate the spamming business.
Jaynes has pledged that regardless of the final outcome of his trial,
he will never again be involved in what he called the "email marketing
business".
It is believed that 70% of all emails are spam.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm
Published: 2005/04/09 00:22:55 GMT
© BBC MMV
.
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 08:30:57 AM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:u4af51pk5pcd9nml5tf9tqpki88giuaatl@4ax.com...
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
Only NINE years? A slap on the wrist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 05:43:05 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 21:30:57 +0800, "Peacenik"
<cnelsonpublic@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:u4af51pk5pcd9nml5tf9tqpki88giuaatl@4ax.com...
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
Only NINE years? A slap on the wrist.
Maybe if they used the Football clock to run out that time......
drift
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 02:57:06 AM |
|
|
In article <u4af51pk5pcd9nml5tf9tqpki88giuaatl@4ax.com>,
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a
crime.
"It was not just sending bulk emails, he was falsifying the routing
information, disguising the origin," said prosecutor Lisa Hicks
Thomas.
"The end user couldn't say: don't send this to me," she added.
Ms Thomas said she was pleased with the ruling and hoped it would be
upheld.
'Never again'
Jaynes was operating though an America Online (AOL) server in Loudoun
County, where the world's largest Internet services provider is based,
and is believed to have sent some 10m unwanted emails a day.
Products advertised in his emails included a "Fed-Ex refund processor"
which he claimed would have allowed people to earn $75 an hour by
working from home.
Jaynes, who is from North Carolina, will appeal on the grounds that he
has been charged as an out-of-state resident under a Virginia law that
has only just come into effect.
His sentence is the harshest punishment handed down so far for junk
emailing in the US, and appears to be a strong signal that authorities
will not tolerate the spamming business.
Jaynes has pledged that regardless of the final outcome of his trial,
he will never again be involved in what he called the "email marketing
business".
It is believed that 70% of all emails are spam.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm
Published: 2005/04/09 00:22:55 GMT
© BBC MMV
Too light! Give him a year for every spam message that got through.
Hopefully, that would serve as a warning to others.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank J Warner" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 10:05:25 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachm-F0D44F.00570610042005@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <u4af51pk5pcd9nml5tf9tqpki88giuaatl@4ax.com>,
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a
crime.
"It was not just sending bulk emails, he was falsifying the routing
information, disguising the origin," said prosecutor Lisa Hicks
Thomas.
"The end user couldn't say: don't send this to me," she added.
Ms Thomas said she was pleased with the ruling and hoped it would be
upheld.
'Never again'
Jaynes was operating though an America Online (AOL) server in Loudoun
County, where the world's largest Internet services provider is based,
and is believed to have sent some 10m unwanted emails a day.
Products advertised in his emails included a "Fed-Ex refund processor"
which he claimed would have allowed people to earn $75 an hour by
working from home.
Jaynes, who is from North Carolina, will appeal on the grounds that he
has been charged as an out-of-state resident under a Virginia law that
has only just come into effect.
His sentence is the harshest punishment handed down so far for junk
emailing in the US, and appears to be a strong signal that authorities
will not tolerate the spamming business.
Jaynes has pledged that regardless of the final outcome of his trial,
he will never again be involved in what he called the "email marketing
business".
It is believed that 70% of all emails are spam.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm
Published: 2005/04/09 00:22:55 GMT
© BBC MMV
Too light! Give him a year for every spam message that got through.
Hopefully, that would serve as a warning to others.
We're all dancing for joy prematurely. The sentence has been deferred
on appeal. Jaynes is free on $1 million bail until the appeals process
concludes, which could take 3-4 years. There is, evidently, a problem
with the law under which he was convicted; something to do with state's
rights and a conflict between Maryland and Virginia statutes.
Meanwhile, Jaynes is living in a $2,700 per month home in a country
club community, with an estimated net worth of 4 to 5 million dollars.
There is no real justice.
-Frank
--
Here's some of my work:
http://www.franksknives.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 06:24:37 PM |
|
|
In article <100420050805254303%warnerf@veriSPAMMERSDIEzon.net>,
Frank J Warner <warnerf@veriSPAMMERSDIEzon.net> wrote:
In article <jhachm-F0D44F.00570610042005@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <u4af51pk5pcd9nml5tf9tqpki88giuaatl@4ax.com>,
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a
crime.
"It was not just sending bulk emails, he was falsifying the routing
information, disguising the origin," said prosecutor Lisa Hicks
Thomas.
"The end user couldn't say: don't send this to me," she added.
Ms Thomas said she was pleased with the ruling and hoped it would be
upheld.
'Never again'
Jaynes was operating though an America Online (AOL) server in Loudoun
County, where the world's largest Internet services provider is based,
and is believed to have sent some 10m unwanted emails a day.
Products advertised in his emails included a "Fed-Ex refund processor"
which he claimed would have allowed people to earn $75 an hour by
working from home.
Jaynes, who is from North Carolina, will appeal on the grounds that he
has been charged as an out-of-state resident under a Virginia law that
has only just come into effect.
His sentence is the harshest punishment handed down so far for junk
emailing in the US, and appears to be a strong signal that authorities
will not tolerate the spamming business.
Jaynes has pledged that regardless of the final outcome of his trial,
he will never again be involved in what he called the "email marketing
business".
It is believed that 70% of all emails are spam.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm
Published: 2005/04/09 00:22:55 GMT
© BBC MMV
Too light! Give him a year for every spam message that got through.
Hopefully, that would serve as a warning to others.
We're all dancing for joy prematurely. The sentence has been deferred
on appeal. Jaynes is free on $1 million bail until the appeals process
concludes, which could take 3-4 years. There is, evidently, a problem
with the law under which he was convicted; something to do with state's
rights and a conflict between Maryland and Virginia statutes.
Meanwhile, Jaynes is living in a $2,700 per month home in a country
club community, with an estimated net worth of 4 to 5 million dollars.
There is no real justice.
For those who got it. If he were some poor college kid geek he'd be in
the slammer.
-Frank
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 05:35:50 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 08:05:25 -0700, Frank J Warner
<warnerf@veriSPAMMERSDIEzon.net> wrote:
In article <jhachm-F0D44F.00570610042005@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <u4af51pk5pcd9nml5tf9tqpki88giuaatl@4ax.com>,
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a
crime.
"It was not just sending bulk emails, he was falsifying the routing
information, disguising the origin," said prosecutor Lisa Hicks
Thomas.
"The end user couldn't say: don't send this to me," she added.
Ms Thomas said she was pleased with the ruling and hoped it would be
upheld.
'Never again'
Jaynes was operating though an America Online (AOL) server in Loudoun
County, where the world's largest Internet services provider is based,
and is believed to have sent some 10m unwanted emails a day.
Products advertised in his emails included a "Fed-Ex refund processor"
which he claimed would have allowed people to earn $75 an hour by
working from home.
Jaynes, who is from North Carolina, will appeal on the grounds that he
has been charged as an out-of-state resident under a Virginia law that
has only just come into effect.
His sentence is the harshest punishment handed down so far for junk
emailing in the US, and appears to be a strong signal that authorities
will not tolerate the spamming business.
Jaynes has pledged that regardless of the final outcome of his trial,
he will never again be involved in what he called the "email marketing
business".
It is believed that 70% of all emails are spam.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm
Published: 2005/04/09 00:22:55 GMT
© BBC MMV
Too light! Give him a year for every spam message that got through.
Hopefully, that would serve as a warning to others.
We're all dancing for joy prematurely. The sentence has been deferred
on appeal. Jaynes is free on $1 million bail until the appeals process
concludes, which could take 3-4 years. There is, evidently, a problem
with the law under which he was convicted; something to do with state's
rights and a conflict between Maryland and Virginia statutes.
Meanwhile, Jaynes is living in a $2,700 per month home in a country
club community, with an estimated net worth of 4 to 5 million dollars.
There is no real justice.
-Frank
Damn: Some people shoot and kill abortion doctors. I think that in the
case of spammers it would be justifiable homicide, although a lifetime
of electrical shocks to the brain appeals to me more.
We may enrich the pool of scientific knowledge that way.
drift
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 05:32:17 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 00:57:06 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpres.com> wrote:
In article <u4af51pk5pcd9nml5tf9tqpki88giuaatl@4ax.com>,
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a
crime.
"It was not just sending bulk emails, he was falsifying the routing
information, disguising the origin," said prosecutor Lisa Hicks
Thomas.
"The end user couldn't say: don't send this to me," she added.
Ms Thomas said she was pleased with the ruling and hoped it would be
upheld.
'Never again'
Jaynes was operating though an America Online (AOL) server in Loudoun
County, where the world's largest Internet services provider is based,
and is believed to have sent some 10m unwanted emails a day.
Products advertised in his emails included a "Fed-Ex refund processor"
which he claimed would have allowed people to earn $75 an hour by
working from home.
Jaynes, who is from North Carolina, will appeal on the grounds that he
has been charged as an out-of-state resident under a Virginia law that
has only just come into effect.
His sentence is the harshest punishment handed down so far for junk
emailing in the US, and appears to be a strong signal that authorities
will not tolerate the spamming business.
Jaynes has pledged that regardless of the final outcome of his trial,
he will never again be involved in what he called the "email marketing
business".
It is believed that 70% of all emails are spam.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm
Published: 2005/04/09 00:22:55 GMT
© BBC MMV
Too light! Give him a year for every spam message that got through.
Hopefully, that would serve as a warning to others.
Now *that's really good thinking!! Honestly, I wish I thought of that.
Maybe we could also administer a teaspoon of castor oil (or drano) for
each item of spam, too.
Cut off his toes and wait until he's hungry enough to eat them.
drift
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 06:55:56 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 11:04:51 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a
crime.
"It was not just sending bulk emails, he was falsifying the routing
information, disguising the origin," said prosecutor Lisa Hicks
Thomas.
"The end user couldn't say: don't send this to me," she added.
Ms Thomas said she was pleased with the ruling and hoped it would be
upheld.
'Never again'
Jaynes was operating though an America Online (AOL) server in Loudoun
County, where the world's largest Internet services provider is based,
and is believed to have sent some 10m unwanted emails a day.
Products advertised in his emails included a "Fed-Ex refund processor"
which he claimed would have allowed people to earn $75 an hour by
working from home.
Jaynes, who is from North Carolina, will appeal on the grounds that he
has been charged as an out-of-state resident under a Virginia law that
has only just come into effect.
His sentence is the harshest punishment handed down so far for junk
emailing in the US, and appears to be a strong signal that authorities
will not tolerate the spamming business.
Jaynes has pledged that regardless of the final outcome of his trial,
he will never again be involved in what he called the "email marketing
business".
It is believed that 70% of all emails are spam.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm
Published: 2005/04/09 00:22:55 GMT
© BBC MMV
GREAT! I'm absolutely thrilled, honestly, that there ARE penalties for
abusing the internet. Just like harassing, interfering, nuisance and
threatening phone calls, the morphidite originators of this trash MUST
be dealt with harshly. Why? Because it's practically free for them
while the millions of victims, the recipients, pay in terms of time
and electricity, as opposed to junk paper mail, where the recipient
merely has to throw it away and the spammer has to pay postage.
(still, it wastes paper)
Nine years, huh? Maybe he should share a cell with a 7 foot 400 pound
horny man pumped up on Viagra. Handcuffed to the guy.
Sham merchandise or not, spamming MUST be stopped. It should be legal
to do painful things to spammers.
drift
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 05:11:52 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 11:04:51 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 05:51:30 AM |
|
|
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Nine years? He's getting off easy!
Think of all the money lost to spam -- both directly and indirectly
through lost productivity.
Add up all the money spent on spam blockers & filters. Add up all
bandwidth & storage space that goes to spam, and how much
the end users are paying for that. And then there's all the people
he's sending the reply messages to, their expenses & wasted
efforts. It's never the spammer's return address on thee-mails they
send out, it's never their servers & mailboxes getting choked
with bounces & replies.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter van Velzen" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 01:06:21 PM |
|
|
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<c4SdnXdCTrcrLMrfRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Nine years? He's getting off easy!
Think of all the money lost to spam -- both directly and indirectly
through lost productivity.
Add up all the money spent on spam blockers & filters. Add up all
bandwidth & storage space that goes to spam, and how much
the end users are paying for that. And then there's all the people
he's sending the reply messages to, their expenses & wasted
efforts. It's never the spammer's return address on thee-mails they
send out, it's never their servers & mailboxes getting choked
with bounces & replies.
My my, you people do have a grudge don't you.
I receiverd only 1300 spams so far, so I have another idea.
9 years would be sufficient, but he should be locked up having only
contact with the outside world by a computer.
And he should have to delete, as many spams a day, as he used to sent
before getting on-line.
I think that would be fair.
Peter van Velzen
April 2005
Amstelveen
The Netherlands.
I believe the spiritual to be solely within the realm of the human
mind.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 07:55:22 PM |
|
|
On 9 Apr 2005 11:06:21 -0700, (Peter van Velzen)
wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<c4SdnXdCTrcrLMrfRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Nine years? He's getting off easy!
Think of all the money lost to spam -- both directly and indirectly
through lost productivity.
Add up all the money spent on spam blockers & filters. Add up all
bandwidth & storage space that goes to spam, and how much
the end users are paying for that. And then there's all the people
he's sending the reply messages to, their expenses & wasted
efforts. It's never the spammer's return address on thee-mails they
send out, it's never their servers & mailboxes getting choked
with bounces & replies.
My my, you people do have a grudge don't you.
I receiverd only 1300 spams so far, so I have another idea.
9 years would be sufficient, but he should be locked up having only
contact with the outside world by a computer.
And he should have to delete, as many spams a day, as he used to sent
before getting on-line.
I think that would be fair.
Nope. Gotta be pain. An 110 watt soldering copper, rectally inserted,
connected to a variac: with the voltage increased at the rate of the
hour hand of a clock, up to the 130% voltage the old variacs used to
top off at. Pins could be used to keep the eyelids open, and halogen
lights focused on the pupils while dialated medically could be
connected to the same variac.
If you read my other responses to this thread, by now you think I'm
abnormal. You are correct. But please realize it comes out in response
to those who deserve it; I'm actually a loving helpful talented
person, with a heart of gold. But I cannot tolerate abusers and I put
much time into thinking of how to punish them, for they hurt many at
little cost to themselves. That's worse than being a politician,
cancer, leprosy, a horde of locusts, or super termites at a
shipyard..
I wish I had an imagination so I wouldn't have to think this ***** up.
Peter van Velzen
April 2005
Amstelveen
The Netherlands.
I believe the spiritual to be solely within the realm of the human
mind.
drift
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DJ Nozem" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 03:40:41 PM |
|
|
On 9 Apr 2005 11:06:21 -0700, (Peter van Velzen)
wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<c4SdnXdCTrcrLMrfRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Nine years? He's getting off easy!
Think of all the money lost to spam -- both directly and indirectly
through lost productivity.
Add up all the money spent on spam blockers & filters. Add up all
bandwidth & storage space that goes to spam, and how much
the end users are paying for that. And then there's all the people
he's sending the reply messages to, their expenses & wasted
efforts. It's never the spammer's return address on thee-mails they
send out, it's never their servers & mailboxes getting choked
with bounces & replies.
My my, you people do have a grudge don't you.
I receiverd only 1300 spams so far, so I have another idea.
9 years would be sufficient, but he should be locked up having only
contact with the outside world by a computer.
And he should have to delete, as many spams a day, as he used to sent
before getting on-line.
I think that would be fair.
I think that would be deliberate infliction of RSI. He'd also become
certifiably insane. Cruel and unusual punishment, at least.
I think 9 years is appropriate. I just hope they get to seize all of
his assets, and hopefully roll up more spammers.
--
We give meaning for each other
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter van Velzen" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
11 Apr 2005 02:09:47 PM |
|
|
DJ Nozem <djn@thisaddressdoesnotexist.com> wrote in message news:<qbfg519ib481k1gh2id0lsov0povf77716@4ax.com>...
On 9 Apr 2005 11:06:21 -0700, (Peter van Velzen)
wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<c4SdnXdCTrcrLMrfRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Nine years? He's getting off easy!
Think of all the money lost to spam -- both directly and indirectly
through lost productivity.
Add up all the money spent on spam blockers & filters. Add up all
bandwidth & storage space that goes to spam, and how much
the end users are paying for that. And then there's all the people
he's sending the reply messages to, their expenses & wasted
efforts. It's never the spammer's return address on thee-mails they
send out, it's never their servers & mailboxes getting choked
with bounces & replies.
My my, you people do have a grudge don't you.
I receiverd only 1300 spams so far, so I have another idea.
9 years would be sufficient, but he should be locked up having only
contact with the outside world by a computer.
And he should have to delete, as many spams a day, as he used to sent
before getting on-line.
I think that would be fair.
I think that would be deliberate infliction of RSI. He'd also become
certifiably insane. Cruel and unusual punishment, at least.
I think 9 years is appropriate. I just hope they get to seize all of
his assets, and hopefully roll up more spammers.
Why? an eye for an eye is Cruel and unusual?
I guess you are right,
I just liked to point how much suffering a spammer is actually causing.
And - of course - I like to make up cruel schemes.
Not that I could ever carry them out.
Peter van Velzen
April 2005
Amstelveen
The Netherlands.
I believe the spiritual to be solely within the realm of the human mind.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 08:07:01 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 22:40:41 +0200, DJ Nozem
<djn@thisaddressdoesnotexist.com> wrote:
On 9 Apr 2005 11:06:21 -0700, (Peter van Velzen)
wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<c4SdnXdCTrcrLMrfRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Nine years? He's getting off easy!
Think of all the money lost to spam -- both directly and indirectly
through lost productivity.
Add up all the money spent on spam blockers & filters. Add up all
bandwidth & storage space that goes to spam, and how much
the end users are paying for that. And then there's all the people
he's sending the reply messages to, their expenses & wasted
efforts. It's never the spammer's return address on thee-mails they
send out, it's never their servers & mailboxes getting choked
with bounces & replies.
My my, you people do have a grudge don't you.
I receiverd only 1300 spams so far, so I have another idea.
9 years would be sufficient, but he should be locked up having only
contact with the outside world by a computer.
And he should have to delete, as many spams a day, as he used to sent
before getting on-line.
I think that would be fair.
I think that would be deliberate infliction of RSI. He'd also become
certifiably insane. Cruel and unusual punishment, at least.
I think 9 years is appropriate. I just hope they get to seize all of
his assets, and hopefully roll up more spammers.
Good, solid thinking. And when we get enough spammers. we must get
creative: reference my earlier responses in this thread.
Let's see, what can I add now? OK. Here we go. Cut off their hands,
and sew the wrists together surgically behind their back, let it heal,
then chain a 16 pound bowling ball there.
An acupuncture needle in each ear stirrup connected to a high voltage
pulser would be interesting. We used to make shockers in electronic
shop as teenagers to see how much one could take. I built the best
one: 4 D cells, with a 2N2554 transistor (TO9 case) and output
transformer, with not only an intensity control but a frequency
control. When the challenger said "that's nothing (lying but holding
on for sheer pride) I'd up the frequency. I never lost.
drift
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 07:35:22 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 06:51:30 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Nine years? He's getting off easy!
Think of all the money lost to spam -- both directly and indirectly
through lost productivity.
Add up all the money spent on spam blockers & filters. Add up all
bandwidth & storage space that goes to spam, and how much
the end users are paying for that. And then there's all the people
he's sending the reply messages to, their expenses & wasted
efforts. It's never the spammer's return address on thee-mails they
send out, it's never their servers & mailboxes getting choked
with bounces & replies.
Billions of $. I DO think of it all the time. It's internet abuse and
cannot be taken mildly. All for the enrichment of absolute
bullshitters because a tiny percentage of the millions of computer
users are stupid enough to send them money.
Psssst - Listen:->
Why not a "Do Spam" list? The fools can sign up for "bulk E-mail from
anyone" ; we can make it a crime to send a sales pitch to anyone *not*
on the list. It would be easy: spammers would simply visit
"spamme.now.gov" and get the list of fools with money to throw away.
We could charge for a spamming license and a tax. The fools could even
be required to pay a fee, and an extra "sales" tax on money sent to
spammers. And, since we have the best politicians money can buy, it
should be easy. They are good people, they say so themselves! Who
could argue with that?
Money for the crooks from the stupid and leave the rest of us alone?
What's the opposite of dystopia?
NAH - It'll never work. It's too logical. And, I bet, the spammers are
already in with the government, just like all other large scale
crooks.
Nice dream, though!!
Don't read this if you don't like it.
Horse *****.
drift
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 08:17:26 PM |
|
|
<drift@lost.net> wrote
We could charge for a spamming license and a tax.
The fools could even be required to pay a fee, and
an extra "sales" tax on money sent to spammers.
Bill Gate's has been pushing the electronic "stamp."
The plan I read about wouldn't allow any e-mails without
this electronic stamp, which would cost anywhere from
a few cents on up. If the person on the other end accepts
your e-mail you retain the stamp, you don't have to buy
another one. If the user doesn't accept it then the stamp is
gone, and you'll have to buy another one.
At a penny a stamp, a spammer like the man described
here would have to spend about $100,000 each day to
cover the stamps -- this on a current profit of only
about $750,000 per month. He'd be bankrupt by the
8th day.
At issue, of course, are administration costs, privacy
rights, copyrights, licensing fees and, of course, internal
e-mails.
A penny a day would be enough to crush almost all
commercial spam, but where's the profit in that?
How can large corporations make money taking in
a lousy penny a stamp, even if people are buying them
100 at a time?
And then there's the authentication software. Microsoft
would want a few hundred dollars a copy, and of course
it wouldn't work anyhow, at least not until the second
or third patch solved the problem with it formatting your
hard drive.
And if somebody is keeping track of stamps then they're
keeping track of e-mails.... who sent them... who received
them.
And think of all the internal e-mails a company like IBM
sends each day. Do they really need to buy enough stamps
to cover all of them, when they're only going too & from
their own network?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 10:10:15 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Bill Gate's has been pushing the electronic "stamp."
The plan I read about wouldn't allow any e-mails without
this electronic stamp, which would cost anywhere from
a few cents on up. If the person on the other end accepts
your e-mail you retain the stamp, you don't have to buy
another one. If the user doesn't accept it then the stamp is
gone, and you'll have to buy another one.
At a penny a stamp, a spammer like the man described
here would have to spend about $100,000 each day to
cover the stamps -- this on a current profit of only
about $750,000 per month. He'd be bankrupt by the
8th day.
And then your grandmother gets a mass-mailing
worm on her PC and gets a bill for $10,000
from whoever manages the electronic stamp
program.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 10:14:59 PM |
|
|
wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Bill Gate's has been pushing the electronic "stamp."
The plan I read about wouldn't allow any e-mails without
this electronic stamp, which would cost anywhere from
a few cents on up. If the person on the other end accepts
your e-mail you retain the stamp, you don't have to buy
another one. If the user doesn't accept it then the stamp is
gone, and you'll have to buy another one.
At a penny a stamp, a spammer like the man described
here would have to spend about $100,000 each day to
cover the stamps -- this on a current profit of only
about $750,000 per month. He'd be bankrupt by the
8th day.
And then your grandmother gets a mass-mailing
worm on her PC and gets a bill for $10,000
from whoever manages the electronic stamp
program.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
This is, of course, an urban legend. It's bounced around the Internet
for years now.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Choose God!" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 04:42:23 AM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
And then your grandmother gets a mass-mailing
worm on her PC and gets a bill for $10,000
from whoever manages the electronic stamp
program.
This is, of course, an urban legend. It's bounced around the Internet
for years now.
*****:
http://www.internetnews.com/xSP/article.php/3496551
Unless you're talking about a worm resulting in a huge
bill. That is *****, if you have to buy the stamps
prior to sending e-mails out.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 01:16:34 AM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Bill Gate's has been pushing the electronic "stamp."
The plan I read about wouldn't allow any e-mails without
this electronic stamp, which would cost anywhere from
a few cents on up. If the person on the other end accepts
your e-mail you retain the stamp, you don't have to buy
another one. If the user doesn't accept it then the stamp is
gone, and you'll have to buy another one.
At a penny a stamp, a spammer like the man described
here would have to spend about $100,000 each day to
cover the stamps -- this on a current profit of only
about $750,000 per month. He'd be bankrupt by the
8th day.
And then your grandmother gets a mass-mailing
worm on her PC and gets a bill for $10,000
from whoever manages the electronic stamp
program.
This is, of course, an urban legend. It's bounced around the
Internet
for years now.
The only "urban legend" part is when someone says that
"X" (a congressman, Bill Gates, whoever) is about to make
it happen - the idea itself is one that keeps getting
kicked around by real people who, while they don't
have the technical expertise to realize why it's a
stupid idea, may have the political power to make
it a reality.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Choose God!" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 04:47:36 AM |
|
|
<firelock_ny@hotmail.com> wrote
The only "urban legend" part is when someone says that
"X" (a congressman, Bill Gates, whoever) is about to make
it happen - the idea itself is one that keeps getting
kicked around by real people who, while they don't
have the technical expertise to realize why it's a
stupid idea, may have the political power to make
it a reality.
He's not about to make it happen, but Bill Gates has been
a force behind the idea:
http://www.internetnews.com/xSP/article.php/3496551
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 05:24:49 PM |
|
|
On 9 Apr 2005 20:10:15 -0700, wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Bill Gate's has been pushing the electronic "stamp."
The plan I read about wouldn't allow any e-mails without
this electronic stamp, which would cost anywhere from
a few cents on up. If the person on the other end accepts
your e-mail you retain the stamp, you don't have to buy
another one. If the user doesn't accept it then the stamp is
gone, and you'll have to buy another one.
At a penny a stamp, a spammer like the man described
here would have to spend about $100,000 each day to
cover the stamps -- this on a current profit of only
about $750,000 per month. He'd be bankrupt by the
8th day.
And then your grandmother gets a mass-mailing
worm on her PC and gets a bill for $10,000
from whoever manages the electronic stamp
program.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
See?
Fortunately, authorities know about the address forging, and the
solution is at the source: the spammers themselves - they have to go.
Where I don't care, but it should suck and have no internet access.
They should be kept alive so they suffer until death, they should
receive proper medical care except pain relief.
Send the spammers to me. Soon, I will have a nice place and will be
able to build a "treatment" room: guaranteed to get to and change
their mode of thought. I am very creative, and would love
experimenting with the sub-human brain these people have.
OOH the idea is delicious!!
NAH - just wishful thinking, good idea or not.
I have enough constructive things to do. I have a life, albeit it
would be slightly better without spam.
drift
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
10 Apr 2005 05:16:25 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 21:17:26 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
<drift@lost.net> wrote
We could charge for a spamming license and a tax.
The fools could even be required to pay a fee, and
an extra "sales" tax on money sent to spammers.
Bill Gate's has been pushing the electronic "stamp."
The plan I read about wouldn't allow any e-mails without
this electronic stamp, which would cost anywhere from
a few cents on up. If the person on the other end accepts
your e-mail you retain the stamp, you don't have to buy
another one. If the user doesn't accept it then the stamp is
gone, and you'll have to buy another one.
At a penny a stamp, a spammer like the man described
here would have to spend about $100,000 each day to
cover the stamps -- this on a current profit of only
about $750,000 per month. He'd be bankrupt by the
8th day.
At issue, of course, are administration costs, privacy
rights, copyrights, licensing fees and, of course, internal
e-mails.
A penny a day would be enough to crush almost all
commercial spam, but where's the profit in that?
How can large corporations make money taking in
a lousy penny a stamp, even if people are buying them
100 at a time?
And then there's the authentication software. Microsoft
would want a few hundred dollars a copy, and of course
it wouldn't work anyhow, at least not until the second
or third patch solved the problem with it formatting your
hard drive.
And if somebody is keeping track of stamps then they're
keeping track of e-mails.... who sent them... who received
them.
And think of all the internal e-mails a company like IBM
sends each day. Do they really need to buy enough stamps
to cover all of them, when they're only going too & from
their own network?
I thought that Gates' idea was already put down. He's no genius in
creating solutions, rather, like Thomas Edison, he's a brilliant con
man paying geniuses for inventions attributed to him.
And, paying for E-mail is not the solution. That would legitimize spam
- and further advance abuse of the internet while enriching the wrong
people.
Like parking fines: people ignore them until the city physically
begins to remove the vehicles: it's been in the news lately - a few
scofflaws had their vehicles impounded, and the parking violations
phone has been ringing off the wall with violators
anxious to pay up.
The solution is to enforce the law and apply the penalties for
infractions thereof. If you are not a spammer you should agree that
spammers should be physically mutilated. Or something like that.
Sorry, I get ballistic when thinking of the spammers. My respect for
them is lower than that of the filthiest of politicians and crooked
cops.
drift
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
11 Apr 2005 07:34:00 AM |
|
|
<drift@lost.net> wrote
I thought that Gates' idea was already put down.
Actually, it never got up in the first place. But all
indications are that Gates is still behind it.
The solution is to enforce the law and apply the
penalties for infractions thereof.
With the hundreds of billions we spend each year for
law enforcement, the law enforcement agencies claim
they don't have enough money to enforce the law.
And, besides, they're all far too busy not doing more
important things to bother failing at trying to catch
spammers. Why, there's the people behind the anthrax
attacks that they still haven't caught (after 4 years),
and things like 9/11 to not stop.
They've barely got enough money to not do their job
as things currently stand, and we'd have to give them
hundreds of billions more if we expect them to make
a few token efforts against spammers while the fail
miserably at actually accomplishing anything.
THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 07:14:28 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:11:52 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 11:04:51 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Death is too sweet for these people. You know about the aerosol
styrofoam sold in hardware stores with the nozzle like they use for
whipped cream? Do you know how much and how quickly that ***** expands?
how sticky it is? How hard it is to remove from *anything* before or
after it dries? I hate to use the word *****, but it's a clue to where
this styrofoam could be injected into the spammers body. If Hitler had
this, we'd all be speaking German.
I've endorsed the death penalty in the past but now think it's better
torture for these creeps not to have an easy out. Jail is supposed to
suck and they should be there as long as possible. It's even been said
it's cheaper than the court cost of all the appeals in a death penalty
case - why enrich lawyers unnecessarily and possibly to the criminal's
benefit? But that's not what I came here to argue about - let's just
dream about torturing spammers..... for now.
drift
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 11:12:56 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:11:52 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 11:04:51 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Death by slow torture, preferably. Nine years is far too light a
sentence.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 12:22:47 PM |
|
|
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:j70g51pselkeejig5r86bv4g7pkals4gtl@4ax.com...
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:11:52 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 11:04:51 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Death by slow torture, preferably. Nine years is far too light a
sentence.
Not ETERNAL torture, mind you, but more than 9 years!
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 08:18:38 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 16:12:56 GMT, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:11:52 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 11:04:51 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Death by slow torture, preferably. Nine years is far too light a
sentence.
Yup!! Let's read some of *your ideas. I've posted several tonight,
let's get rolling. Out of many ideas. a few workable, effective ones
may emerge. I've contributed a few, lets really pool and at least come
up some good fantasies, maybe even some workable solutions.
Don't be afraid of thinking, even radically, because if you are sane
your mind *will* return.
Think out of the loop. Do not be afraid to do so.
(I'm required to say that)
drift
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kenny Leong" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Man gets nine years for spamming! |
09 Apr 2005 09:07:02 AM |
|
|
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message news:<h1bf51d5b7h7489i8l8k9m79ri4t875hbf@4ax.com>...
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 11:04:51 +0100, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote:
Man gets nine years for spamming
A man has been sentenced to nine years in jail by a Virginia judge for
sending millions of junk emails, or "spamming".
Jeremy Jaynes, 30, is the first person in the US to get a prison term
in a spam case. He is said to have been the world's eighth most
prolific spammer.
By selling sham products and services advertised in his messages, he
earned up to $750,000 (£398,000) per month.
Jaynes has appealed, and the court has put off the start of his prison
term because the new law raises questions.
Such as why the death penalty isn't applied routinely in such cases...
Yah...vermin like that deserves more punishment than just 9 years in the slammer.
Kenny
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
