"Buffalo Spammer" Gets 3.5 to 7 Years 671
jfruhlinger writes "Howard Carmak, aka the 'Buffalo spammer,' has been sentenced to jail time for his spamming activities. Interestingly, the conviction was not for spamming per se, but rather stealing someone's identity, which he then used to launch his spam messages."
3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:5, Insightful)
From the article:
The jail sentence is the maximum allowed under the law, due to Carmack's prior felony conviction for fraud in a federal case involving fake money orders, McCarthy said.
7 years is the maximum for identity theft? That actually seems a little light. I would think they'd lock him away for 15-20 for something like that. Theft + potentially ruining someone else's credit and/or reputation.
shall we start taking in a collection? (Score:4, Insightful)
Good... (Score:5, Insightful)
Should be this way more often, arrest spammers for using machines they have no proper access to, not for just for spamming.
Bye bye, Howard, it's been fun reading about you. (Score:5, Insightful)
Nah nah... nah nah nah nah... hey hey hey... good-BYE!
When I read that Howard Carmack told Earthlink, "Nothing is in my name, so you'll never catch me," all I could think was, you arrogant, silly man. These are government agents and corporate attorneys that you're up against. You're an overweight criminal in his mid-30s who lives in a shack in Buffalo. I think they're gonna catch you, and right quick.
Sure enough, they did. In addition to his prison time, Carmack has a multi-million-dollar judgment against him from Earthlink for his misuse of their network.
Have fun in prison, Howard!
Sounds to me a little excessive (Score:1, Insightful)
conviction time (Score:3, Insightful)
Hopefully this implies that the government is realizing that most spammers are already criminals, email is just a new venue to commit the fraud.
Whatever it takes... (Score:5, Insightful)
SPF is a good idea, I get tired of that checklist that says why your idea won't work. It's pedantic and discourages good ideas from being discussed.
If SPAM is allowed to thrive offshore, I see a time when service providers like AT&T are asked to track SMTP and provide governments the figures for - you guessed it - tariffs.
Good (Score:3, Insightful)
But I have mixed feelings on this. If it was 3.5-7 for spamming, I would certainly say that is appropriate, but for identity theft? This is something that RUINS peoples lives. In a lot of cases, the vitims propogate their anguish to loved ones etc... and some even go as far as committing suicide. Actually, it stinks of the same horror as rape... you come out the other side ruined and broken... and 7 years isnt sufficient.
I personally believe we need to get things back in perspective. If you destroy someones life, whether physically, or otherwise, you should lose yours. You arent fit for our society. BURN.
Some of the longest sentences in history... (Score:2, Insightful)
It's a good thing for this guy that sentencing for spam doesn't work like that: he supposedly sent 800 million emails using the two identities he stole.
Then again, it wasn't a spam law under which he was convicted and sentenced. But put a few spammers away for 800 million years, and it might help in the neverending fight.
/"You get out of jail about when the Sun has expanded to the size of Mars' orbit."
Glad he was caught, and for the right reasons (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to go after spammers, there are plenty you can go after suing existing laws. We don't need new laws specifically for spam anymore than we need new laws specifically for music sharers. Use the existing laws.
Identity theft (Score:2, Insightful)
For what its worth, MD just increased the penalties for spammers.
jr
Another example of old laws still relevant today (Score:5, Insightful)
Often here we see that new technology doesn't necessarily require new laws. Arresting and charging a spammer using someone else's identity to avoid being caught and held responsible is a good way to round these people up. It avoids the free speech issues completely.
al capone don't want me for a sunbeam (Score:2, Insightful)
cool beans either way, so long as this guy can't continue his evil ways. capone was thrown in jail for taxes, but it kept him from mafia'ing.
this is a little (Score:4, Insightful)
Yas I read the article. He has a prior felonies, and he stole 2 people's identity.
from the article, it seems like he used the identites to send spam. Not exactly devastating. If he had used thoose ID's to charge credit cards, buy a car, etc.. then a couple of years in prison would be adequate.
Considering how full our prisons are, and how tight state budgets are, perhaps there could be better solutions? Community service springs to mind.
He should also be responsible for undoing harm to the people whose identities he stole. We all know what a pain it is to call the credit card companies, and find out what we need to do to prove it wasn't us and get any marks removed from are credit history.
I wonder what are the consequences (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it should (Score:4, Insightful)
What people tend to do, and Americans in particular, is to confuse "freedom of speech" with "guaranteed right to an audience". Preferably on somebody else's bill.
And THAT particular bird is not going to fly.
You have the right to say whatever you want to say (well, almost, nowadays). You do not have the right to force me to listen to any of it. You do not have the right to force somebody else to carry your message.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
If the death penalty applies to spam, and someone might get caught for spamming, then they may as well just go kill someone while they are at it. Maybe kill the witnesses. It can't increase the severity of the penalty, so why not?
Part of justice is appropriate punishments. Walking with a swagger and carrying a noose might impress people who failed to graduate high school, but it doesn't make us any safer, or freer.
Re:Yes, it should (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Bravo everyone! We all had a part in this. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:shall we start taking in a collection? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you people seriously telling me, that a suitable punishment for spamming is being fucked up the arse?
They actually don't need to be that harsh (Score:5, Insightful)
Most spammers will then quit. These aren't hardened, fear nothing, criminals we are talking about, they are sleazy bussiness men that see this as an easy, low risk way to make a buck. Show them it's not low risk, most of them will knock it off.
There will still be some, of course, there is always somebody stupid enough to try something, but I think it can be kept to a minimum, in the US at least (which is where the majority of it starts anyhow).
Re:Good... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:shall we start taking in a collection? (Score:1, Insightful)
Another serious question: Why do you assume its just Americans who are making a joke of this? People get raped in prison all over the world.
Re:Yes, it should (Score:3, Insightful)
I don t believe corporations have the right to say whatever they feel like saying. They are, after all, a group of people who may or may not be working together for a common cause (a day in any large corporation would reveal that the latter is probably more common).
Re:3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:1, Insightful)
We Yanks need more forward thinkers like you!
Re:3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:1, Insightful)
Why does this suprise you. Victims have no rights; why should the criminal courts care what happens to them?
l8,
AC
Re:3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong; the man's a scumsac and a general nutcocker. But even so, he's a person with irreplaceable years of life, who can reform as we should hope anyone can. Financial judgments against him could have chased him for decades, which seems sufficient punishment.
Italy is seeking to jail MP3 traders, and we are jailing a con artist. Both crimes are relatively innocuous compared to years of jailing. I can only urge others to keep a sense of perspective about such things.
They also need to prosecute... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yes, it should (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely not!! A corporation exists solely to generate a profit. It has no morals, no ethics and cannot be deprived of its life or liberty for its crimes. Freedom of speech is a human condition intended for humans. When humans can hide behind a corporation, they can not be held accountalbe for their actions or speech. For example, Dow Chemical murdered 800 people in Bhopal India. Was it forced to cease existing? Of course not. Any entity which has no compulsion to behave with human responsibilities has no expectation of human rights.
It has long been accepted that not ALL speech is free. You cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theatre and you cannot expect unbridled rights to make commercial claims.
Re:3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:5, Insightful)
This is extremely ignorant. The guy is an identity theif. How in the hell is denying him credit going to encourage him to stop using fraudulent identification?
"You won't give me a credit card? Fine. I have tons of experience acquiring them from people who already have them."
Great solution.
Re:I wish I could sneek money into the prison, (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:shall we start taking in a collection? (Score:3, Insightful)
No. Not unless it's with a red-hot steel rod lined with sharp barbs.
Re:shall we start taking in a collection? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm with you. I don't think it's funny and I don't think anyone deserves that.
Even if you do think that some criminals deserve it, what about the tens of thousands of innocent people who were wrongly convicted and ended up in prison?
Re:3.5-7 Seems a little light (Score:1, Insightful)
I say he oughta get the chair, or lethal injection for that one alone.
Re:Pound-me-in-the-ass prison is Cruel and Unusual (Score:2, Insightful)
Aggregate costs (Score:3, Insightful)
It is nice to meet a compassionate individual here on slashdot but keep in mind how many aggregate "irreplaceable years of life" this scumbag cost others in filling up people's inbox with junk or having to spend time setting up filters, etc. !
Re:Victimless Crime? (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's say two gay men have anal sex. Where's the victim? Yet, untill recently, that was illegal in Texas. Many states have had anti-masterbation laws in the past as well. Where's the victim there?
People just like screwing up other people's lives for the hell of it.
Re:shall we start taking in a collection? (Score:3, Insightful)
A lot of that talk is frustration. Our constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment. Unfortunately, many judges have interpreted that as forbiding any real punishment. Why else do so many keep going back to jail again and again?
China has a much lower prison population than the US, both in total number and in prisoners per 100,000 people (China: 119/100K, US: 701/100K; figures from http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/worldbrief/wo rld_brief.html [kcl.ac.uk]). The China numbers include the so-called "political prisoners", so the number of true criminals is probably much lower.
While there are numerous reasons, one of them is life in a Chinese prison is bad. China has few repeat offenders (ok, partially because repeat offenders tend to get executed). While in the US, working is optional, yet you still get decent food, clothing, medical, and shelter. Convicted murderers have a better health care plan that I do! Many US criminals spend their time learning from others how to be better criminals.
If it wasn't for abuse by other prisoners, a lot more people (in the US) wouldn't care if they went to jail. It's the only real punishment some criminals get. Getting seriously abused is a powerful message not to screw up again.
My mother used to teach at an inner city school where her students getting sent to juv hall was a regular occurance. They would tell her that they didn't mind because it was better than their home life. When a 12 year old (repeat offender) pulls up to cop in a stolen car and asks him if he wants to drag race, it should tell you how much they care about being caught.
The talk you are referring to is just people wanting some punishment that make the offender (and others) not be a repeat offender. If it takes making the spammer someone's girlfriend to get the message across, then so be it.
So it would seem fair... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:shall we start taking in a collection? (Score:3, Insightful)
No, that's not what I'm saying. A crime is still a crime, even if occurs within a prison. However, if that's the best justice a victim can hope for, many will take it happily. Hence the posts. In a perfect world, this wouldn't be needed, but then in a perfect world, prisons wouldn't be needed either.
Not necessarily. It all depends on the circumstances. I could give lots of examples, but I won't. Instead, think about the various *criminal* classifications for killing someone. There's first degree murder (aka capital murder in some states), second degree murder, and manslaughter (some states have variations on this). It all depends on the circumstances.
Many would disagree with you, including myself. Sometimes one must be sacrificed for the good of the group. Sucks if you are the one, but in this case, these people had a choice. They chose murder(s). They had more rights than they gave their victim(s).
No argument here.
Re:Both examples are deficient (Score:1, Insightful)
Consentual sodomy could spread disease, but the risks of transmission are lower when proper precautions are used. Precautions are much more likely to be used when there is no need hide the activity bacause it's illegal.
For a crime to be victimless, it's really only something that someone (including yourself) consents to. It must also not endanger or inconveniece someone else. ID theft might be better said is that the victim did not suffer direct physical harm. For example physical assult. As a consequence of the crime, the victim could have lost the resources to get medical treatment (for example), however this would be indirect.
If you're going to regulate self-abuse, then 4/5th of Slashdot would have no love life at all.
Off-topic: Prohibition on any activity should only be a last resort outside of theft, assult or murder (broadest definitions here). If it is more-or-less 'victimless', then regulate if you have to, otherwise, leave it alone.