Judge In e360 Vs. Comcast Rules e360 a Spammer

Brielle Bruns writes "Yesterday, Judge James B. Zagel dismissed claims against Comcast by e360. In the decision, the judge says: 'Plaintiff e360Insight, LLC is a marketer. It refers to itself as an Internet marketing company. Some, perhaps even a majority of people in this country, would call it a spammer.' This clears the path for Comcast's counter-suit." e360 is the spammer that got a default judgement against Spamhaus, as we have discussed on numerous occasions.

e360 aren't spammers. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone knows they are merely a 'high volume email deployer'.

Re:What's the distinguishing characteristic?

[ChuckSchwab]

WTF is with you people? Trying to draw all these hairsplitting lines between "okay" solitations and "not okay".

So-called "spam" is not the problem. The problem is that all you idiots use an outdated system that ALLOWS anyone to send information packets through it with zero traceability, zero accountability, zero credibility.

Isn't it *our* fault, collectively, for spam? For relying on such a crappy, corruptible system of communication in the first place? If we put a giant button on our homes that says "press to begin ignition process", we'd hardly be justified in claiming that button-pushers are the source of our ills.

As long as we're ordering our lives around such a corruptible system, we have precisely ZERO right to complain.

And I don't even hate "spam" like apparently the rest of you do. What you call "spam", I call "messages that give me info on the latest products, technologies, and business modesl." You want less of it? I want MORE of it. Hell, two weeks ago, I got a good deal on a prescription drug (that I won't name...) at about $50 for a year's supply. It takes a while to deliver (hasn't arrived yet), but you sure as hell can't beat the price.

And the fact is, that consumers LIKE spam. Why do you think spam is profitable? Because people buy the products advertised!

I think a study asked a bunch of questions about the internet to people to look for correlations and what they found was striking:

90% of people who think spam should be "eliminated some time in the future" have bought something on line. Does that make ANY sense whatsoever? You hate getting ads in your email, but you're all so eager to buy on line?

Re:What's the distinguishing characteristic?

[randyest]

You should stop doing that. Instead, stuff all the spam back into the postage-paid business reply cards envelopes they send. With a little tape, you can really fit a lot of paper into one of those. They look like balloons when I mail them back. And the mail-spammer gets to pay the postage for the trash back to them! Free for me, helps the post office with a little revenue, and financially penalizes the mail spammers -- that's win/win/win!

Re:CvE

[misleb]

At least Comcast offers services that people actually WANT. You may not like some of their policies, but they are what I would call a "positive" business. That is, as opposed to a negative business like e360 that acts more as a parasite offering "services" that consumers don't really want and quite often hate. They leech off the system.

I say, "Go Comcast!"

Re:What's the distinguishing characteristic?

[spacefiddle]

Hmmm. Are you perchance related to this guy [bash.org]?