Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Spam

Motorola Sues Over Pager Spam 137

Posted by Hemos from the going-after-the-spams dept.
erroneus writes "There's been a lot of talk about pager spamming. I've got to hand it to the spammers. Their combination of low conscience and creativity makes them the continual annoyances they are today. But many people are charged for each page they recieve. " Update: 07/10 06:22 PM by H : I apologize to the people who were mislead about by the summary - I had assumed that it read one way, and did not. Here's a summary from nategasser: "...when in fact they're sending regular email offering an off-brand pager and calling it a Motorola."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Motorola Sues Over Pager Spam More

Motorola Sues Over Pager Spam

Comments Filter:
  • That stinks -- people are also charges 2 cents or so for each incoming SMS message on their phones.
  • ZD's article is fluff. The story above contains no information. How is this news?

    Twoflower


    --
  • Spam at home...

    Weird Al said it best: Spam is everywhere :op

    It's nice to see companies standing up for this, though it's obviously for their own interests.

    Screw 3...

  • Good for them. Sue those bastards back to the stone-age.

    As for spam, I go and read the ZDNet article and then hit "back" on my browser...what pops up but a FULL page browser window ad. A whole new browser for a single ad served up from ZDNet. How ironic is that?
  • It'd be fun to see how motorola (add many other companys to this) would handle this with international cases? - For an example, where I live, in Sweden, many forms of "mass messaging" (e.g. SPAM) recently got allowed because of a new law, making it impossibile to sue many persons over here. I'm not educated in law or anything, but how would a company like motorola handle that? /040
  • Since a lot of people pay per message on their pagers, pager spam is one of the few, if any other ways that spam causes the recipient to incur cost of receiving spam.

    Rant at will about "free speech", but this certainly isn't free.

  • Make Money Faster Than God (Score:5)

    by LaNMaN2000 ( 173615 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:02AM (#97116) Homepage
    SUE THE SPAMMERS! Then, send $1 to each of the last 6 people who did the same, append your name to the bottom of the list, and send away.

  • Spamming is not the main problem here (Score:4)

    by b1t r0t ( 216468 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:03AM (#97117)
    The problem is that the spammers claimed to be offering Motorola pagers when they weren't. The main problem in this case seems to be misuse of trademarks and (not surprisingly for spammers) fradulent misrepresentation of what they were offering. But I do hope Moto puts the hammer down nice and hard on these cockroaches of the internet.
  • How exactly can Motorola sue because of it?

    If unsolicited SMS messages are illegal, does that mean we have to call someone to ask their permission to send them a text message?

  • This is about email spam (Score:5)

    by StormCrow ( 10254 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:03AM (#97119) Homepage
    I didn't read anything in the linked article about people spamming pagers. The article seems to be about Motorla suing a company that was email spamming people claiming to give away Motorola pager, when they were really giving away a different (inferior) brand. It appears the lawsuit is more about false advertizing and trademark dillution than the actual spam.
  • You realize that the article is about a company spamming people (via EMAIL) to get them to BUY their service and get a free Motorola pager.

    This has nothing to do with spam sent via pager or SMS.

    I won't even go into the fact that the article is a month old.

  • Am I the only one that thinks perhaps the problem is not with the spammers, but with the pricing model that allows them to flourish?

    When I call someone long distance, I pay for the call, so that's why I don't call people I don't know. Otherwise I could pick some dude in Taiwan and bankrupt him in a matter of days.

    Why doesn't Motorola stop talking to their lawyers and sort out some pricing that makes sense.

  • Bogus headline, bogus writeup (Score:5)

    by dillon_rinker ( 17944 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:06AM (#97122) Homepage
    This would be better titled "Motorola sues over trademark violation." The fact that the ad was sent via pager is totally irrelevant. The fact that the ad said they were offering a Motorola T-10 pager, when in fact they were not, is the reason Motorola was suing.
  • "The Glenayre pagers, some of which were actually sent to those who responded to the e-mail, have some similarities to the Motorola T-10. They are both two-way pagers, and the Glenayre pager uses some Motorola software."

    This is the longest running problem with spam. It actually works! How do you explain that?

    "Hey, check out my new pager, I bought it from a spammer".

    Who are these people?

  • It would be nice if the article was about people spamming pagers, but it's NOT - IT'S ABOUT PEOPLE SENDING SPAM OFFERING FREE MOTOROLA PAGERS

    Can I sue /. for my wasted time because article descriptions don't match up the the articles they link to? It gets really frustrating.
  • You might try *reading the article link*. Slashdot editors and submitter comments are *NOT* to be trusted.

    You would see that the primary reason is that they say they are offering T-10 pagers but are, in fact, not. Also this apparently has been ongoing since before February. Additionally the company is ignoring opt-out requests.

  • Come on people (Score:5)

    by Zaknafein500 ( 303608 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:11AM (#97126) Homepage
    I've heard complaints about the editorial staff getting lazy...this proves it. The article (which I remember reading on News.com when it was first posted more than a month ago) is about a company falsely advertising a Motorola pager. Do the editors even look at the articles to make sure that they pertain to what they person was talking about?

  • New SPAM!! (Score:5)

    by ageitgey ( 216346 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:14AM (#97127) Homepage
    Recently seen on website banner:

    "Punch the moving slashdot editor and win $20*"

    *There is no slashdot editor

  • Old news, kind of (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Well, I can't say too many details. But, it involved 3 people 5 years ago and and toneloc. (A DOS based wardialer).

    Accept, they where not using this to spam ads to people, but more to get them to call enemys. These people where able to keep the local pizza huts phones busy all day long. Making it impossiable for customers to order. In time, they where forced to close down.

    This went on for many many months. Many bussiness where forced to shutdown, MANY people simply disconnected there phones perminatly (even to this day! :)

    This people also thought about advertising some of there website, but feared a connection. So, they started spamming porn sites for some very nasty things.

    Also, remeber, back then alpha numeric pagers where much more expensive then today. $200 for the pager, ~$60/month. Most pagers didn't have 800 numbers for operator dispatch, they used a computer and a "special program" to connect to it. It is as easy as connecting with 1200 bps and sending some simple strings.

    Today, its much easier ... becuase you can use websites to send the pages :)

  • Look how easy spam is to stop everywhere but here! (Score:3)

    by Crewd ( 199804 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:17AM (#97129)
    Let's take a look at some of the more recent articles on spam [slashdot.org], and the editors commentary.

    Web-Based Emailers That Allow an Access List? [slashdot.org]
    Here Cliff writes :
    "It seems like this would be a fairly easy thing to implement, I mean, how difficult would it be to stick a web interface in front of procmail? Does your e-mail web-based service do this? Maybe it's time to start sending some polite emails encouraging them to do so, if they aren't."

    Maybe we should send some polite emails to the slashdot staff asking for filters?


    Senator Says Spammers Have First-Amendment Rights [slashdot.org]
    Commentary by CmdrTaco:
    "...Spammers take away my property and happiness. Isn't that a right too? And opt-out is a joke. I've opted out of countless things, but I still get a hundred+ spams a day. Thank god for mail filters."

    Wouldn't it be nice to have slashdot filters?


    When Spammers Use YOUR E-Mail Address? [slashdot.org]
    Cliff again:
    "SPAM is one thing, but cowardly spammers who have to use someone else's address for their crap advertisements is something else. What can one do in this situation?"

    Sounds sorta like what happens around here. Cowardly spammers posting to a public forum. What can one do in this situation? Add filters!


    Buried in email? [slashdot.org]
    CmdrTaco again:
    "Filtering my mail is the only thing that makes reading my email possible."

    Boy, he sure loves those filters. We'd like to use them here also!


    To sum things up, how about some filters? I sure would like to ditch anything I personally find offensive.
  • The pager spam adds up, especially if you have AOL Mail controls set to forward your AOL mail to you. I do the same with outlook express, and a filter of if each message is 1k.

    However, I still get "Check out Britney Spears and Natalie Portman making out XXX!" in my pager sometimes. Very annoying, as well as pushes me over the char limit sometimes.

  • Slashdot readers sue over bogus bullshit "news" (Score:4)

    by duffbeer703 ( 177751 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:18AM (#97131)
    Story at 11
  • Actually, the ad was sent via e-mail, which means that this is in the right topic, at least...

    According to the article, people tried to opt-out of the e-mail list, and (surprise surprise) weren't, and then started e-mailing Motorola to complain.

    Motorla is also apparently trying to sue the Florida-based spammers via "unsolicited e-mail statutes" as well as trademark infringement.

    So yeah, the article and headline are completely misleading, although in the strictest sense "Pager Spam" is accurate, as it was spam regarding pagers...

    --

  • Now face Bill
    Think about his direction, wonder why he made Windows at all
    Spam in the place where you were
    Now face down
    Think about your pager, and the asshole that is spamming you
    Now spam.......

    I'm sorry, complete spur of the moment thing :)
    to be sung to REM's Stand
  • that the topic of the Slashdot story was the same as the title of the cnet story? The /. editors didn't screw this one up, they just copied and pasted another person's mistake
  • The Proxomitron [cjb.net] will prevent that (and a lot of other ad annoyances as well).
  • The story just posted here [slashdot.org] on Slashdot yesterday about a guy running RC-5 and getting sued for bandwidth usage may apply to Spammers. What if ISPs sued spammers for the cost of the bandwidth wasted on the frivelous email crap sent to millions of their users. I hope the guy in Georgia doesn't get punished, but if it goes through it could be applicable to anything people don't want on their network...like Spam.

  • Re:International (Score:3)

    by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:28AM (#97137)
    > It'd be fun to see how motorola (add many other companys to this) would handle this with international cases?

    Exactly half the spam I get is from .tw -- and about half of that is in a language I can't even read.

    If I bust a USA spam source with spamcop I generally never hear from them again, but when I bust .tw sources it doesn't slow it down in the least. I assume the upper-level ISPs over there think spam is cool.

    At any rate, I'm sure there will be laws passed against it in some countries, but the spammers will just migrate to spam havens and keep on spamming away. (Maybe we'll get a SeaLand-like spam haven with its own domain? Is .sh, "SpamHaven", already taken?)

    All that to the side, I really don't understand spammers. Most of them act like they are more interested in annoying you than they are in selling their products. Maybe it's just a special style of trolling?

    --
  • Congratulations AC, you are the first moron to bring up the same pro-spam arguments (just hit delete, spam is free speech) that have been debated and debunked in every single spam discusion [slashdot.org].

  • Re:Makes sense (Score:4)

    by tomk ( 20364 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:31AM (#97139)
    Not true. Many forms of spam pass the cost on to the innocent "spammee". For instance, email spam places a burden on network infrastructure, and increases the required size of email inboxes. The cost for this is then passed on to the consumer via increasing cost for ISPs.

    The best way to combat these types of spam is to shift the cost of spamming onto the spammer. For instance, charge people who send the pages, rather than those who receive them (perhaps allow some number of "free" pages per month from each originating phone number). Charge those who send emails, based on the volume of email sent. Again, have a maximum "free" amount of email that can be sent before being charged for it.

    In fact, if costs of spamming could all be shifted to the spammers, then the revenue from that could be used to provide "normal" users with the free (gratis) services that they've come to expect from the internet economy, at the expense of having to deal with increased targeted advertising. Think of over-the-air TV, where the advertisers foot the whole bill.. The same thing could be done with email, pages, etc..
    -TomK
  • One reason junk faxing was outlawed was that it cost the end users money to recieve the junk faxes. I'm sure laws of this nature will set a precedent for spam over pagers or wireless messenging.
  • Would it be too much for a slashdot edit^h^h^h^h babysitter, to actually read the submitted articles and see if they make sense. For the uninformed, the article is about an email sent out to people offering a free pager which is billed as a Motorola (but is not), not messages sent out to people over pagers.

    Beyond that, how could anyone believe Motorola would sue someone for using their pagers? They're equipment manufacturers, not service providers. Duh.

    I can hear slashdot getting stupider...

  • Would I pay for "content" like this? No.
  • Works for me. Plus, here in the US, spam is protected speech. If we stop spam, it will just be the start of banning all speech. We should not stand by and watch Motorola wipe out our rights. Plus, how are people going to know what new products are available to them with out ads? The economy is having a hard enough time with out regulating how companies can advertise and generate new revenue streams.

    That was probably a troll but...

    commercial speech is NOT protected in the US. you have a right to free speech, not to advertise your products. There are many laws which reflect this fact, eg, the anti-junk-fax laws.

    If they really need to have us hear about their new product, they can pay to mail us stuff, they can pay to advertise on a TV program or newspaper or website, but they have no right to send us postage-due advertising for free like junk email, junk faxes or junk pages.

  • Posted by polar_bear:

    Actually, SPAM doesn't fall under the protection of the first amendment. Sure, they have a right to talk about their products or whatever, but they don't have a right to force you to listen - which is what they do when they send unsolicited email.

    I am 100% sure that the people who framed the Constitution were not in the least concerned with protecting these pricks. As far as I'm concerned, spammers are just one rung above child molesters and one rung below drunk drivers on the moral ladder. If Dante were alive today he would have added an extra layer to Hell just for spammers...
  • Folks, how can you expect an on-topic writeup when the story is submitted by somebody whose chosen nick is a misspelling of a word meaning "wrong". The very universe would break if that blurb had been factual.
  • If gun makers can get sued and lose for what people do with their "designed to kill" product, then authors of bulk mailer software are as guilty as the spammers themselves, yes? Rootkits, bulkmailers, I see no difference here.
  • now if i can only do something about first financial bank calling me every night to offer me a credit card that i don't want, even after repeated requests by me to put me on their do not call list.

    in the US, you can sue them in small claims court for a few hundred bucks per call if you keep believable records.

    before that law, I used to insist upon talking to the manager, and them tell him that the next time I got calls from them I'd sue for criminal harrassment and put his name in the complaint. worked like a charm every time.

  • Consumers worldwide received the mailings even after they attempted to opt out by replying with the word "remove" in the subject line of the e-mail, according to the lawsuit.

    This can't be! We all know that opt-out works perfectly, and that those nice, friendly spammers always honor remove requests.

  • Wouldn't it be great if this article was about how to hack a toaster so that it could spam text pagers on a certain frequency? That would be a good read. Aside from the FCC violations that is.

    --

  • Re:Come on people (Score:5)

    by Erasmus Darwin ( 183180 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @11:50AM (#97150)
    Do the editors even look at the articles to make sure that they pertain to what they person was talking about?

    Let's not forget the submitter's culpability in all this. Slashdot editors have a multitude of stories to deal with. This submitter had only one submission to worry about, but managed to still completely fuck it up. The only thing I can think of is that the submitter was desperately watching news sites for Slashdot-themed news, and didn't want to miss out on the chance of being first submitter by wasting the time necessary to actually read the article.

  • The best way to combat these types of spam is to shift the cost of spamming onto the spammer. ... Charge those who send emails, based on the volume of email sent. Again, have a maximum "free" amount of email that can be sent before being charged for it.

    The problem is finding those who send the emails. A lot of folks bounce them through open relays, using web-based mail systems that are never necessarily seen by an ISP. Who charges them... the ISP who magically "sees" email going out via a web-based service? Or do they simply sit at the recieving ISP or hosting company until the bill has been paid?



    -Mynn the Museless
  • Instead you should be angry about the fact that the government has beaten down your wages by giving your job to a foreiger with a HB12 Visa

    Actually, it's an H1-B Visa, and I'm really happy to have one - AND be earning a SHITLOAD more than you thankyouverymuch.

    Simon
  • but what about FREE SPEECH? :)

    --

  • The linked article is about trademark violation. If the spammer was sending out Motorola pagers, Motorola would have no case. In addition, Motorola has no standing to sue for spam sent to others ( unless it goes through their system or is represented as comming from them). Its legal, and proper, to use a trademark to identify a product or a service. Just like suck sites, XXsucks.com is proper use of XX because they are the ones who suck.

  • And they NEVER record the lists of people who request to opt-out as people who read their email and, are therefore, good people to send spam to.
  • I've never heard of sending spam directly to pagers, though I don't doubt that it could happen. The ZD article, however, is about good old fashion email spam that is about a free pager offer. The /. blurb makes it sound like the spam is sent to pagers (But many people are charged for each page they recieve.) but thats not what the story is about! For those too lazy to read the link (ie hemos perhaps?) the lawsuit is regarding "free motorola pagers" that are not actually made by motorola.

    ___
  • Sure, they have a right to talk about their products.
    They are talking not about their products. They are talking about Motorola products. And they are lying. That's why Motorola sues them.

    Next time please read the article more carefully. General reasoning about spam doesn't apply well to this situation.

  • "Pager SCAM" would have been more accurate.
  • Spamcop.net is your friend.
  • I don't like getting pages that arn't important, be it spam, wrong numbers, anoying friends. I did see a pager services a while back that you didn't have to pay for. I gave you a 900 number, and the caller had to pay something like $.25us to page you. Now that I like. If your serious about getting in touch with me right now, you'll pay. Any seen this service latly?

    -Jacob
  • Well, the write-up "But many people are charged for each page they recieve." Makes sense if people received the pager scam spam on their pager, but it still doesn't explain the "combination of low conscience and creativity".

    But this kind of really forces the issue. Is someone drunk behind the wheel of Slashdot?
  • Maybe we'll get a SeaLand-like spam haven with its own domain? Is .sh, "SpamHaven", already taken?

    That would be great. If I could just filter all mail originating from an ".sh" domain, all my problems would be solved... :)
  • that's not quite acurate. first of all, remember that loads of people still have per-minute charges on net connections, either through their provider, like AOL, or via telephone charges. that's a direct cost. also, keep in mind that this method is the only real option in many parts of the world outside the U.S. - again, a very real, direct cost. another direct cost - although a much smaller one - is the storage of that email on my system. this is generally neglegable and recoverable, but i've worked in environments where everything is backed up permenantly to WORM media. that's a direct, tangible cost in terms of a used-up resource.
    also, in cases where the cost of spam isn't directly on my shoulders - such as when my ISP bears it by way of providing the bandwidth or storage, don't think for a second they're not passing that cost on to the end user.
    for even less direct costs, there's the issue of my time.

    so no, i'm afraid pager spam isn't the only spam with direct end-user costs; it's just more easialy aparent.
  • Hrm ok. First off you can filter out articles on topics you don't like. Second you can filter articles by score. Not that many people actually spam on slashdot, and the ones that do get modded lower than a limbo stick at carnival time (quote hermes conrad). I really don't think slashdot needs filters, and unlike email or pager spamming, no one is pushing thier opinions or ads into your personal mailbox, you have the option of not reading slashdot anymore if you don't like the opinions of people here.
  • If there is just *one* thing that I would ask of Slashdot (and yes, maybe even pay a "subscription" for) is a proofreader.

    Just a single person. Their entire job is to simply run a posting through a spell-checker/grammar-checker, and look for glaring problems. The proofreader would also read the linked-to article and make sure that the story jives with it.

    This is a simple low-pay position that I'm sure VA Linux can afford, and would help protect the reputation of their Slashdot property. Minimum wage. Maybe someone with a degree in English. Probably dozens of those lying around your local bookstore.


  • Maybe guns are not the right analogy...

    Bulk email software : spam :: Napster : piracy ?

    Could bulk email software manuracturers be liable? Should they have to program in checks to make sure its not being used to spam? (at least once some of this pending legislation passes, hopefully). Its something that should be able to be done. If spamcop can determine spoofed IPs, why cant these programs do it beforehand?
    --------

  • is that the poster is 'erroneus'
    ba-doom ching

  • You want slashdot filters? (Score:3)

    by flimflam ( 21332 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @12:05PM (#97168)
    Go to here [slashdot.org] and filter away!
  • Redundant? This post is both unique, and thus, by definition NOT redundant, and, more to the point, hits the nail on the head.

    The gentleman is insightful.

    KFG
  • Spam on my pc at work...
    E-mail crap
    Think about the lovebug virus,
    Wonder if they sent it again
    Spam on my pager as well,
    It sucks ass
    Think about erections,
    Cause porn is all that you'll ever see.

    If you're feeling pissed,
    Get out Quake 3
    Use a Bill Gates Skin
    ...and go on a spree
    The railgun is there to peg off his head
    The spam is there even after he's dead

    Oh spam...
    Spam
    It sucks ass...
    Spam
    Spam

    Shameless second Rip-Off

    Screw 3...

  • Could bulk email software manuracturers be liable? Should they have to program in checks to make sure its not being used to spam? (at least once some of this pending legislation passes, hopefully). Its something that should be able to be done. If spamcop can determine spoofed IPs, why cant these programs do it beforehand?
    The problem is, you can write scripts and auto responders and "email programs" that spam with a little bit of effort, mostly just by scanning a few script sites, or so it seems. I've been looking for a way to implement web-based email for my self and family members for our family site, it doesn't look that hard to implement some freeware and then add in stuff to spoof IP addresses and bounce it off of open relays.



    -Mynn the Museless

  • Empty, all is null. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Who post this article got a chance to read the story?

    And who wrote the article knows anything about journalism?

    If you go to the website, you will see it is not about spam via pager. Motorola is (mainly) suing a company because this company offered a Motorola hardware (the pager) that were not made by Motorola.

    Okay, now on to the article:

    Here are some quotes:

    "He (Motorol's Vice President) also asked anyone receiving the e-mails to file complaints with their state's attorney general."

    Why would anyone do this? If you are read the article from to beginning to this phrase, you will see the only thing mentioned about lawsuit was the brand protection.

    Not about spam. Motorola and the article are asking for people to join Motorola to make a bigger trial army. That's bias number one.

    Other quote:

    "The Glenayre pagers(who really made the advertised pager), some of which were actually sent to those who responded to the e-mail, have some similarities to the Motorola T-10".

    Under what conditions were the pagers sent? The article writer doesn't clarify why some people received and why some have not. That's a major hole on it. Those who have not received, why didn't have they? If the writer didn't want to know, he is playing on the Motorola side. He just wrote 'some actually sent'. This phrase leaves an open interpretation to 'some people have not received', and no proof is given. That's bias number two.

    Another quote:

    "But the T-10 has a 70,000-character memory, while the Glenayre pager has 50,000 characters of memory. The T-10 has an automatic garbled message correction and the ability to save a new message when the pager is out of reach, while the Glenayre device does not."

    Who the hell cares about the differences, and MOST important, in what the T-10 is superior? That's a lame advertisiment, or a writer's capability to make compliments to Motorola. Nothing about lawsuit, it's a totally off-topic (or off-article) statament. That's the whole point of this article anyway. To say Motorola is right. This quote becomes my bias number three.

    Quote about people who could not get removed from the mailing list (Obs: Who said this owns a email marketig company):

    "It made me so angry that we have to work so hard to follow the rules, but these guys didn't--and didn't even after people started complaining," the man said."

    Realize that it's a executive telling his experience with the company being sued. Yet, he says "WE HAVE TO WORK TO FOLLOW THE RULES". That's not about his 'work' (duh, click) to get removed, but about his own company practices. He said that HIS company works hard and there are people on the market that don't follow 'rules' (BTW has spam, or email marketing for the matter, 'rules'? I guess not).

    So, the journalist put a introductory text and misplaced a executive quote to reinforce his point. He was not talking about the spam issue, but about market practices. Yet, the article makes you think that he was. That is my bias number four.

    To summarize, I have some complains to make:

    1) The article is old,

    2) Only part of Slashdot's news that is correct is the link. That's sad and deceptive, or maybe we can assume the person who put made a huge mistake, what's even worse.

    3) ZDNET's article is NOT journalism. Not even close to tell a story properly. As you can see, it's VERY biased, it is to set reader's to a position while you are reading.

    Of course I am against Spam. I am saying that the spammers should not be sued.

    But, what kind of news is the one that I just read? My 3 summary points goes against everything that you can pull out from the 'news' definition.

    Time for quality control, maybe? :-)
  • This is easy enough to fix. Just set your rules to only forward messages "Sent directly to me" which is Microsoft speak for has my e-mail address on the To: line. This eliminates the vast majority of non-important mail (spam, list-servs, customer courtesy messages and so forth) from being forwarded to your pager or SMS phone.

    In other news: Why is it though to be user friendly to use euphamisms? It it really easier for people to understand "Sent directly to me" than "has my address on the To: line"? Can anyone tell me what system resources are? I have a vauge idea that it has something to do with free RAM but the documentation for MS Resource Monitor never specifies exactly what it is...

    ________________________

  • According to spam laws of various states, including California, Colorado, Tennessee, and to some extent Pennsylvania, all spam covered under their jurisdiction must contain the letters "ADV" in the subject line. I've seen quite a few "ADV" tags, and it makes it a lot easier to filter e-mail.


    Slashdot something useful. [thehungersite.com]
    Management is not a tunable parameter.
  • I use AdSubtract [adsubtract.com], and I'm very happy with it. They have a free and a "pro" version, and it is good at knocking out popups and banner ads..

  • Think "attention economy" (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Actually, the network infrastructure and email inbox size is not an important cost.

    The important cost is the human attention cost for the recipient. I've got this facility that I need to pay attention to in order to do my job, and yet every asshole spammer in the world can also yank on the same chain (I never give out my work e-mail address for non-work purposes, but still, the address leaks out).

    I'd really like to have a more limited e-mail address -- an address that I can give to foo.com which will accept mail only from an authenticated foo.com mail server.

  • RTFA

    the atricle does not say "Motorola sues because spam is bad". it says "Motorola Sues Over Pager Spam". this is accurate - they are because the spam is misleading.

    no more coffee for you

    -c

  • No, it's exactly this kind of stale, factually incorrect story writeup with no redeeming content which will kill the community.

    Death of Slashdot imminent, film at 11.

    Twoflower


    --

  • Re:I've seen SMS spam too (Score:3)

    by iso ( 87585 ) <.slash. .at. .warpzero.info.> on Monday July 09, 2001 @12:24PM (#97179) Homepage

    Yep, the writeup is completely wrong. Look at it again. The username who submitted it is "erroneus." That's awfully close to the word "erroneous" which of course means: "containing or characterized by error."

    I think this story may be a troll, and if it is it's a pretty good one! :)

    - j

  • See if the AIX box has procmail installed. You can use procmail to filter spam, among other things.

  • Here's why: everything in italic type, like this, was written by the original submitter. Everything in normal type was written by a /. editor. For this story, there was no editorial comment.

    /.'s editing has some problems, but you can't lay this one at their doorstep :)

  • If you forward your home phone number to your summer home in the south of France, and a telemarketer calls you, you are still responsible for the long distance charges. It is always, in some sense, your choice to pick up the handset and receive the call (especially with the advent of Caller ID and Privacy Manager-type features).

    By the same token, why should spammers be responsible for charges associated with junk e-mail that gets forwarded to a pager alias? Presumably there's nothing stopping the user from filtering the pages (either with their own software or with their paging service provider's software).

    At first glance, the issue seems to be that no "postage" is being paid for this junk pager mail, but perhaps the real (or more readily addressable) problem is that paging service providers' filter software/access control/etc. is not up to snuff?

    --

    "Shayna, Shayna, Shayna. They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into -- I say, let 'em crash!"

  • "(Maybe we'll get a SeaLand-like spam haven with its own domain? Is .sh, "SpamHaven", already taken?)" If we did that, would all my shell scripts be considered SPAM?
  • What? You mean people posted on /. without reading the article?

    There is a first time for everything, I suppose.
  • ...the article linked to in a Slashdot "news piece" is already purple, or whatever your "visited link" color is set to.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • My Motorola Pager spams... (Score:5)

    by sdo1 ( 213835 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @12:56PM (#97187) Journal
    Since late April, I've received 18 spams with the words "Motorola Pager" in the subject. Obviously, as with most spams, remove doesn't work and only lets them know that your email address is indeed valid. All of those spams contained one of two 800 numbers:

    1(800)443-0596
    1(800)761-0511

    I offer those numbers as a service to the slashdot community since I know you all might be interested in getting yourself one of these "free" pagers.

    Now, I just love spammers as much as the next guy... so I would recommend making sure that as many people as possible see this message (hint, mod me up to +5). Then if everyone calls to inquire about the pagers, think of all the business these spammers will get! Don't call too many times because as you know, each call to an 800 number costs the owners of that number MONEY. We don't want their phone bill to be too high, now do we?

    And don't call unless you're actually interested. We wouldn't want to waste THEIR resources to take care of our pointless calls, would we?

    -S
  • > I still get "Check out Britney Spears and Natalie Portman making out XXX!" in my pager sometimes.

    "How they got into my pager, I'll never know."
    - With apologies to Groucho Marx.

  • If EVERYONE is annoyed by spam then you would think that the spammers would get no return on their spamming efforts. They'd simply stop because it would be a waste of their time. Where is this hidden group of morons who keep buying things advertised to them via spam? Who is making it worthwhile for them?
  • about a man named $random$

    I get two messages a day from "$random$"@(...)

    I thought I recalled seeing someone in here relate spammers with creativity. But then, I always thought creativity was linked to intelligence.
  • Better yet, Spammers the Spammers. We don't have to roll over and take their abuse. If you can find a valid email address for a Spammer (easier said then done) setup a cron job to email that person their own ads. Over time the individuals influence would lessen, due to filtering, but if we all stand up (and maybe spoof a bit) then we can make an impact. Who says vigilante justice is out of style?
  • I think you mean "has killed the community."
  • Who registered COMMAND.COM ;)
  • The US has junk fax laws. I was under the vague impression that spam comes under those, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

    /Brian
  • Can anyone tell me what system resources are? I have a vauge idea that it has something to do with free RAM but the documentation for MS Resource Monitor never specifies exactly what it is...

    Actually, it has nothing to do with free RAM. It's a combination of the GDI and User heaps, and System Resources is just the lower of the 2 (the Resource Monitor will show values of all 3, the Performance tab of the System Control Applet shows the lowest value of GDI and User as System Resources % free).

    So, what's GDI and User resources, you ask? Here's a brief rundown.

    The GDI (graphical device interface) heap is basically a space in memory to be used for graphic elements (cursors, bitmaps, icons, etc). The User heap is for window placement, keybd and mouse interactions, etc. Check references for more info, especially the Technet article here [microsoft.com] (it's about Win 3.x, but applies equally, except for the space limitations).

    The GDI and User heaps are left overs for backward compatibility with Win 3.x, which is why the NT line doesn't have to deal with this crap. Win9x, however, did increase the sizes of the heaps to 32-bits, as opposed to 16-bit, and also increased the number of heaps. So, Win9x has 1 16-bit (64K) User heap and 1 64K GDI heap, and 2 32-bit (2MB) User heaps and 1 32-bit GDI heap. Win 3.0 had 2 16-bit heaps, Win 3.1 had 4 16-bit heaps, 3 User and 1 GDI).

    And, of course, they also upped the limits on a few other things [microsoft.com] as well.

    Just FYI, more RAM does not increase system resources. Only another OS (including NT/2000) will be able to do away with those limitations (or open-source code).

    References: PCForrest [freeserve.co.uk], Adobe TechDoc [adobe.com], and there's a Technet article explaining it all as well, but I'll be damned if I can find it. You can try [microsoft.com] if you like.

  • It is against the law to withhold a persons mail. (In the US.) Including unsolicited mail.

    By that token, should it be unlawful to withhold a person's phone calls?
    What about voicemail?
    Pages?
    SMS messages?
    ...email?

    If the US courts behave liked their theory implies (act on precedent), we have a couple of results:

    A) It will be illegal to withhold a person's sent mail because it would be withholding some other person's email.
    B) (This one's chancy) It will be illegal to ban the sending of any email, because to ban the creation of an email message which would have been created had it not been banned is the same as withholding the receiver's email because the email would have been received otherwise.

    Bear in mind that this law you are stating applies only to mail through the US Postal Service, which is a branch of the federal government. Interfering with the USPS is a federal offense. The same is not true with email. Email is distributed by private companies, government agencies and universities. It is not illegal, nor is is likely to become illegal, to ban sending of any email or to withhold email.

    GreyPoopon
    --

  • I've said that before.. and in some countries you pay to access the internet and wainting for junk email to download costs money. Why should I pay to recieve stuff i don't want?

    But this is the 'trend' today. Always an 'opt out' options, but hardly ever an opt in option. ... opt out of letting financial institutions from selling your personal info, opt out of recieving telemarketing calls, opt out of spam..

    Where are my rights not be disturbed with crap I don't want?

    I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
    Flame away, I have a hose!

  • Do your politicians have e-mail addresses? Spam them until their e-mail boxes bounce mail. Or better still, just forward all your spam to them.
    --
  • Sending advertising to mobile phones, pagers and other similar devices is already illegal. It's included in the same law that prohibits junk faxes. If you receive one, ka-ching! you can sue for $500.
    --
  • *67 will NOT prevent calls to toll free numbers from getting your phone number.

    Toll free numbers get "ANI" delivered to them, not Caller ID. ANI can not be blocked. The theory is, they are paying for the call, they have the right to know who is calling them. (Ironic, in the case of spammers, eh?!)

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • per email payment (Score:3)

    by debrain ( 29228 ) on Monday July 09, 2001 @06:49PM (#97225) Journal
    Now, if I were paying a set fee per email, could I sue spammers, or my ISP (or whoever is providing the email service) sue the spammers, since they are effectively costing me money. Anyone have any idea how well this would hold up???
  • I received several of this version (HTML stripped out) to several different email addresses that I'm responsible for...

    Brand New FREE MOTOROLA PAGER

    Limited Time FREE Offer.

    Call 1(800)761-0511 to be Guaranteed Your FREE MOTOROLA Pager Today

    With this FREE MOTOROLA Pager you will receive the following

    FREE activation. Very small and lightweight. Stay in touch with friends/family. Guaranteed to never miss a page. Brand New FLEX MOTOROLA Pager technology.

    1) This MOTOROLA Pager is small and light weight. 2) A unique never out of range feature. 3) 50,000 character memory & automatic garbled message correction. 4) You can also receive weather, news and sports.

    Call 1(800)761-0511 to get your FREE MOTOROLA Pager TODAY! While SUPPLY Lasts

    To be taken off reply to here

    And a few more that were exactly the same but with another phone number (the other one listed in my first comment).

    And I received several that looked like this (again, no HTML)...

    PRIORITY EXPRESS MAIL

    Absolutely FREE Motorola Talkabout T10 Pager

    You have been selected to receive a FREE MOTOROLA Pager! This side viewable display pager is incredibly small and lightweight. This incredible MOTOROLA PAGER has a unique, never out of range feature so you will never miss a page.

    Call 1(800)761-0511 and Order Your FREE Motorola Pager Today!

    This strictly limited-time offer will enable you to stay in touch with family and friends.

    There is no mistake. Your FREE MOTOROLA Pager is waiting for you-but you must respond soon. If I do not hear from you within 7 days this offer will go to someone else. Please do not allow that to happen!

    When you call you will receive a BRAND NEW PAGER in your choice of color and already programmed with a local telephone number in just a few days!

    P.S. This may be your final notice regarding the FREE MOTOROLA Pager.

    * GET OFF THE LIST HERE

    OK? And I don't have a "beef" with this company (I assume it's only one since I got emails that looked exactly the same except for the phone number). I really want this to generate lots of interest in these products. And I'm sure they won't mind if we call to find out more.

    -S

  • "Slashdot editors have a multitude of stories to deal with."

    Yeah, well they're not exactly editors if they don't edit anything, are they?

  • My girlfriend received and SMS, which was essentially stating:

    CALL ME

    0900-555 55 55

    ($3.95 a minute)

    The whole spacing was intentionally, of course. And I very much suspect, that those scumbags just fired blindly into a random spectrum of phone numbers (i.e: 079 350 00 00 - 079 359 99 99).

    Now, my sweetie is certainly not dumb, but she's generally not interested in the finer aspects of technology.

    If I wouldn't have been around, she'd interpreted the message (CALL ME) literally and would have been out of a couple 'bucks.

    Now this is not spam, in my book. This is outright fraud...

  • that you should not use a public payphone to dial 1(800)443-0596 or 1(800)761-0511 if you're interested into the fine offerings of this company.

    First, if you use a pay phone, this is anonymous and as we all know, who read USAtoday and Time, anonymity is used by terr0rists, kiddie pr0nographers and sm0kers of the wicked weed. Now, you surely wouldn't smoke this stuff, right? So why be anonymous ?

    Also, when you call from a pay phone, those fine and ethical sound business people incurr higher costs. Now, you don't want them to pay through the nose when you dial 1(800)443-0596 or (800)761-0511 . Right ?

  • Oooh, oooh; Me Me Me! (Score:3)

    by Dr_Cheeks ( 110261 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2001 @03:23AM (#97238) Homepage Journal
    I'm looking for a job and this sounds just dandy. Let me get this straight - the other editors do what they're already doing, then I check that they can spell and that they're actually halfway informed about the article by reading it myself. No problem. I've even got my own dictionary! And screw needing an English degree - I am English. And my karma's up at 50, so I must be a useful member of the community.

    Of course, seeing as I'm so over qualified, I'd like £20,000 p/a, but I'm sure you could spare this.

    Hey, chuck in a new PC and I'll even read all the way through Jon Katz's articles!

    Oh, and I'd like my official job title to be Meta-Moderator

  • On the other hand, most pagers are now getting email addresses. I know my cellphone/pager has one, I get several work related messages a week that are emailed.
  • I think this story may be a troll, and if it is it's a pretty good one! :)

    Not a bad theory. I note that the story is more than a month old, too, which would explain why the troll submission wasn't balanced with better ones.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Close