Virginia Court Overturns Spammer Convictions 433
EvilStein writes "CNN reports that "A judge dismissed a felony spamming conviction that had been called one of the first of its kind, saying he found no "rational basis" for the verdict and wondering if jurors were confused by technical evidence." Legal groundwork being set? Will other convicted spammers now have grounds for an appeal?"
Re:300 + spam per day (Score:3, Interesting)
The "car" example (Score:0, Interesting)
But time takes its toll. At some point the car will be wracked by so many problems that it just isn't worth it to hang onto it and you go out and get another car. Sure, you can patch it up (add virus scanners), take it to the repair shop (run a spam filter), even keep it safely in the garage (use a whitelist), but after a certain amount of time, that car just ain't gonna run no more.
Then you get a new one.
Email addresses can't be considered permanent property. At some point they must be discarded and a new address acquired. It's just part of the cost of owning the email link.
You don't complain if a car falls apart after 15 years. You can't complain if an email address becomes unusable after 2. These things just have limited lifespans.
Re:No, no new appeals (Score:2, Interesting)
for instance, in Canada we can use our own case law, and that of the UK as equal. US case law can also be use up here.. but not as a precedent..
at least this is what I got from my law course in high school..
Re:Two ways to look at this ruling (Score:2, Interesting)
If you find any piece of junk mail offensive, for example, woodworking catalogs, you can inform your local postmaster to prevent their delivery to your mailbox. What you find offensive is up to you, not anyone else, which is why I used the woodworking example rather than the Adam and Eve catalog in the example.
E-mail is no different. I don't want penis enlargment material, because frankly I only have two normal sized hands. I should be able to prevent anyone trying to send me this stuff from connecting to my port 25. By force if necessary. Preferably, even.
ahh Virginia... (Score:3, Interesting)
Where drunk driving nets you a slap on the wrist (7 day license suspension, misdemeanor -- Virginia Driver's Manual [state.va.us] [pg. 30]) and spamming sends you to jail.
I'm glad to see we have our priorities straight, and the dangerous people are being kept away from the rest of us.
Re:The "car" example (Score:2, Interesting)
If someone aggressively aged your car in the way spammers aggressively send out spam, you would have them in court in no time.
the whole spam thing (Score:2, Interesting)
this has gotten *way* out of control. a lot of us are the same people who rail on the courts and police for locking up nonviolent drug offenders so that there will be room for the fuckers who really need to be in jail (baby rapers, murderers, kidnappers, the very at-large terrorist element).
so why, oh why, are you upset that someone is NOT going to jail for commiting an utterly nonviolent offense? because you get some penis enlargement and get rich quick email? christ, use a filter. the place to hit these people is in the wallet, not the cornhole (as in pound-me-in-the-ass federal prison). if they're spamming, they're making untold millions of dollars - millions of dollars that can be snarfed up by the federal government.
it has really struck me as entirely ludicrous that the most vocal people in the IT world have been calling for throwing these dickheads in jail, when most spam "victims" get themselves into this mess on their own. i get next to ZERO spam, and i really have never seen what the whole fuss is about. i'm careful about where my email address ends up, and as a last resort i have a good spam filter. gmail does a really good job also. i have 50 invites, so whoever has managed to not get one (i really don't know how anyone couldn't have a gmail account by now), shoot me a message and i'll get one to you pronto.
really people, we have much much worse problems in the world than unsolicited email. the zealots over at spamhaus and spamcop and wherever else really make me chuckle, cuz the joke's on them. i'm glad this guy got off, and i hope they let every spammer that's in jail (i know there's a few) out so we can make room for more deserving scum.
i'll also add this, for you aol and yahoo users: i work for a company that occasionally (NOT hardly the primary business model) sends out what you would call spam, but really these retards signed up for the special offer emails on their own. your ISP's; aol, yahoo, earthlink actually BARGAIN with with some ISP relations person at my company about how much and when they will send the users email, and then they make sure it gets through. i'm sure this happens all the time.
the only person really responsible for keeping your inbox clean and crap-free is yourself.
just my 2c
Re:Why can judges... (Score:3, Interesting)
>of "not guilty". That's the "double indemnity clause".
Err, you mean "double jeapordy." "Double indemnity" refers to double payment on some insurance policies for violent death . .
>l say that every time I've been in a courtroom
>the judges have been universally, absolutely
>professional. I have never failed to be impressed
>by a judge's common sense approach.
I've seen them cross the professionalism line--but with one exception, it was in the name of common sense, and I agreed with them.
hawk, esq.
Re:Two ways to look at this ruling (Score:2, Interesting)
No, I don't believe that's true. Do you have a cite?
Re:Two ways to look at this ruling (Score:3, Interesting)
I said that I think that the first amendment offers protection to spammers. I didn't say I wanted spam. I get enough already, and I don't like it. Indeed, I probably hate ads -- all ads -- more than most people here (I filter
But this is the sort of thing that separates the men from the boys in the free speech arena; willingness to defend speech that's repulsive to you. I'm Jewish, and I'd defend the right of Nazis to speak. I hate ads, and I defend the rights of advertisers. It's the same thing. I understand that not everyone can do this, but that isn't really a good thing.
Its not that others think you shouldn't be heard, but they think you are a turd.
Fair enough.
Re:Slashdot: News for Lawyers. (Score:3, Interesting)
What's next? Articles about surviving the post-dollar crash depression? "Cob/Mud built houses aren't that bad after all.", "Welcoming our Chinese Overlords.", "Programming for Food? HTML for Handouts."
-Steve
Re:Two ways to look at this ruling (Score:3, Interesting)
Then, were it the case that the US postal service forcibly collected postage on mail sent postage due, you would argue there is no legal basis for objection?
I run an ISP. A substantial portion of our money and time goes to maintaining mail servers due to the volume of spam we receive and filter. We have, at times, had our mail servers become completely unavailable to all our customers due to spam overload. Pardon me if I find your argument uncompelling.
While I'm quite sympathetic to the Constitutional guarantee of free speech, and I absolutely oppose restraint on it when the sender pays the costs, I do not see anywhere in this document a guarantee of an audience, nor any support for the notion that the audience should be forced to subsidize that speech. You may not force a publisher or newspaper to publish your written works. You may not come onto my property and post signs or graffiti my home. I fail to see why this is conceptually different.
Isn't a felony a bit much? (Score:1, Interesting)
Sure spam is annoying, but does it justify making the spammer into a felon? A felony conviction can make it impossible for you to get a job. You most certainly cannot get an apartment, and even your right to vote can be suspended depending on the state you live in.
Like I said spam is annoying, but let's make the spam itself a misdemenor. If they sell a product that kills someone or con someone out of their life savings, then there are already laws to prosecute them for those things.
Our society seems to make everything a felony. An 18 year old kid who gets caught with a certain amount of pot is made into a felon. His life is ruined, because of a teenage indiscretion. A dumbass kid decides to release a virus and caused some havok, but make him a felon? That's nuts.