Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Spam Communications

Verizon Wins Injunction Against Text Spammer 92

Posted by Zonk from the seek-another-line-of-business dept.
bulled writes "CNet is running a story illustrating the US court system's ongoing harsh opinion about unwarranted communications of any kind. Verizon Wireless recently won a lawsuit against a company that was delivering massive numbers of spam text messages to its customers. Specialized Programming and Marketing and Henderson was ordered to pay more than $200,000 in damages to Verizon Wireless, some two years after Verizon filed the suit against the company. In 2005 Specialized Programming sent some 100,000 emails to Verizon phones. Verizon now has an injunction against the Marketing firm, another win for a company that has developed a reputation for going after spammers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Verizon Wins Injunction Against Text Spammer More

Verizon Wins Injunction Against Text Spammer

Comments Filter:

  • What about outbound spam? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by winkydink ( 650484 ) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:27AM (#18167072) Homepage Journal
    Good job taking care of inbound spam, but whan will they do something about spam emanating from their networks?

    https://nssg.trendmicro.com/nrs/reports/rank.php?p age=1 [trendmicro.com]

    See #5.

  • what about the customers? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DJCacophony ( 832334 ) <v0dka@myg0tELIOT.com minus poet> on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:28AM (#18167090) Homepage
    Thanks for stopping the spam, Verizon, but are you going to keep all those damages for yourself?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by TheMeuge ( 645043 )
      Exactly.

      Where is the logic here - the company was ordered to pay $200'000 to Verizon, which already charged their customers $XXX for these text messages. So under the guise of "protecting their customers" they just made another wad of cash. I'll eat my shorts if they credit their customers for this.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Jhon ( 241832 ) *
        ...because they didn't spend any money going after the spammer...

        If they were to cover their legal bills with that, then what ever's left over went to the "victums", I'd say "great".
        • The $200,000 was awarded for damages, not court costs. The only damage done was to the customers, who had to pay for the received spam messages. The $200,000 will obviously be in addition to court costs, or as you put it, money spent "going after the spammer".

          • Re:what about the customers? (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Jhon ( 241832 ) * on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:52AM (#18167416) Homepage Journal
            Yeah... that makes sense. However, is that cash in hand? Or would they be justified in keeping it as "damanges" for needing to address user complains/credits? I know two customers who spent time on the phone on more than one occation to get SMS credit due to spam. They got their money back, but Verizon spent "time/money" addressing/fixing their customer's problem.

            How much time/effort needs to be put in to determining who gets what?
      • On my Rogers plan, inbound text messages (up to 2000, i think) are included regardless of your plan. You are only charged for outgoing messages.

        Does Verizon charge for inbound text messages? If so, how much?

        If Verizon does not charge for inbound text messages, then they are entitled to that cash because spam has annoyed their customers (damaging customer relationships) and added to their over air bandwidth costs.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by winnabago ( 949419 )

          Does Verizon charge for inbound text messages? If so, how much?


          Yes, 2 cents from 2003-2005, 10 cents 05-07, and recently it was raised to 15 cents. That's .15 dollars, for those counting.

          It's really amazing that they do this. You can't set up blocks or even turn off messaging at the hardware level, so whatever gets sent, you get. It's most American providers though that do this, so it's not likely to change anytime soon.
          • Such is the advantage of GSM. I have a Sanyo phone (yes, they made one or two UMTS phones) that can block text messages at the hardware level (not sold by the carrier, bought separately unlocked for $25).

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Scratch-O-Matic ( 245992 )
        If you can show that you received spam over the Verizon network during calendar year 2005, you will be eligible to receive a coupon for $5 off any qualified upgrade to your current service. Participating stores only. Two-year contract requirement may apply. Not applicable in conjunction with other settlements. Offer expires February 28th, 2007. Certain legal fees may be deducted from the $5 settlement amount; in some cases, if these fees exceed $5, a claimant may owe Verizon additional funds after a cl

      • Exactly.

        Where is the logic here - the company was ordered to pay $200'000 to Verizon, which already charged their customers $XXX for these text messages. So under the guise of "protecting their customers" they just made another wad of cash. I'll eat my shorts if they credit their customers for this.

        You guys are charged to RECEIVE text messages in the US? What sort of backwards country IS that? Wow. With three cellphone providers here, not one of them DARES to charge us to receive text messages. And for a capped $10, we can send as many as 500 text messages. Obviously the USA isn't the best place to be if you don't want to suffer rampant overcharging.

        • Obviously the USA isn't the best place to be if you don't want to suffer rampant overcharging.

          Yes, exactly. We also feature no censorship, just post-broadcast overcharging of fines, rampant only when small groups wage organised complaint campaigns. OTOH, we really can get the overcharged fees back, but only with persistent niggling during regular office hours. See also REBATES [rebateshq.com], i.e., the monies promised are eventually delivered, but only after 90-120 days.

    • Verizon's market capitalization is just over 100 billion dollars, so 200k is a drop in the ocean in comparison with the company as a whole. I speculate that the company was trying to run SPaMaH out of business rather than trying to turn a profit.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        Verizon's market capitalization is just over 100 billion dollars, so 200k is a drop in the ocean in comparison with the company as a whole. I speculate that the company was trying to run SPaMaH out of business rather than trying to turn a profit.

        Actually, it's because the spammers are costing Verizon money. Think about it - if spamming via SMS is successful, then more people won't go for (overpriced) text packages, thus costing Verizon money. If by going after spammers it clears up their network for a large

  • Seriously (Score:5, Funny)

    by Stokey ( 751701 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:28AM (#18167098)
    Specialised Programming and Marketing and Henderson

    SPaMaH!

    Surely that's too good to be true!

  • Irony. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:30AM (#18167114)
    Clicking on a link and getting an unnecessary advertisement for Best Buy before being able to read the story.

    Also watching the number of FIOS broadband IP blocks that I have to ban skyrocket due to open proxies and SMTP spammers loving the large pipes.

  • Unfortunately (Score:5, Funny)

    by Filip22012005 ( 852281 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:30AM (#18167120)
    $200,000 verizon dollars is only $2,000 US dollars...

    • $200,000 verizon dollars is only $2,000 US dollars...

      You're only partially right.

      Whilst it's true, one Verizon dollar is only 10 cents (US), you forget the following:

      • 10c/dollar usage fee during regular business hours (which strangely continue until 9pm)
      • $5.99/month fee to be allowed to use your dollars during the 6pm-9pm chunk of time they think are regular business hours that no one else seems to consider so.
      • Dollars can only be purchased in $5 blocks.
      • Mandatory government currency fee of $2.50.
      • $5.99/month Dollar Insurance Fee, just incase your cheaply made V
  • I've had Verizon for over 2 years now, and I really don't receive any text spam. But I still say good. Now, share the wealth;)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by otacon ( 445694 )
      Well Verizon reportedly has about 59 million customers...so that would be like $0.0033898305084745762711864406779661 USD Per subscriber. Have Fun.
    • I don't either, but I do get a lot of unsolicited voice messages, mostly recordings from Time Share companies telling me I've won a free vacation. I never give out my Verizon number, so all I can think of is that these are from an auto-dialer program that's just looking to get lucky. The caller ID is always blocked on these calls. So now if I see 'restricted' on my LCD, I just don't pick it up. But it still annoys the crap out of me.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by thePowerOfGrayskull ( 905905 )
        There's a simple solution that's been 100% effective for me: the National Do Not call registry [donotcall.gov]

        A month after signing up, ALL for-profit telemarketing calls have stopped. The only ones that remain are the not-for-profit-beg-for-money-so-80%-can-go-to-the- telemarketing-company variety. While annoying, it's a lot less than it used to be.

        If they're calling your cell phone, that's against the law [the-dma.org].

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Aqua_boy17 ( 962670 )
          Interesting, thanks. We registered our home number when the do-not-call registry first went on line and I don't remember if they had an option for mobile numbers then. As to your second link, I think I knew this was illegal but what's your recourse when the offending number is blocked? Last time I tried calling Verizon, I was on hold for a very long time. Perhaps I'll try the website. Thanks again.
          • Glad I could help. Another useful doc I just found is this page at the FCC [fcc.gov], where they also do say that you need to add your cell number to the DNC list (which was actually news to me, as well). Once that's done, and if you're getting calls after 30 days, they provide a number for complaints/violations.

            ::goes to register his own cell number there::

          • When I first registered my home phone there was no restriction on which number I was registering - so I got my (and my wife's) cell phones also added.

            This brings to my mind another thought - around the beginning of second quarter 2008, a whole lot of people are going to have their registrations expiring. These telemarketing companies are going to be jumping on those expirations and we will definitely see a whole slew of complaints of violations - which may be perfectly legal because of the expiration - of p
      • Isn't there a way to set the caller ID options on your cell account to 'unblock or I won't take your call' similar to the ones available on land line phones? That way the caller can either chose to 'disable caller ID blocking for this call only' (or future calls to this number if the options are that advanced) OR abandon the call. They could still spoof the caller ID I suppose, but at least they have to present *some* form of identification which is probably better than nothing or 'private call'. This way y

  • Sprint sends me SMS advertisements every day (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gelfling ( 6534 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:35AM (#18167202) Homepage Journal
    About one in 10 SMS messages I get are from Sprint (I'm a Sprint customer) advertising a service, ringtone or some other downloadable. So excuse me while I don't feel Verizon's pain.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Secrity ( 742221 )
      I have been a Sprint customer for over 5 years and have never received any spam from Sprint.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by blackdefiance ( 142579 )
      If you respond to one of those messages with "STOP" they'll opt you out. Sprint's policy is to have opt-out instructions in all outbound marketing SMS; if you call them to complain they'll generally take it pretty seriously.

  • Letter (Score:5, Funny)

    by slapout ( 93640 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:37AM (#18167214)
    Dear Verizon,

        Can you please sue my carrier, Cingular*, for all the text messages they send me?

    Thanks

    * Cingular is soon to be part of AT&T, not the AT&T we all remember, but the new AT&T that was SBC until they renamed themselves AT&T after they bought what was left of AT&T after they ran themselves into the ground. Not to be confused with AT&T wireless, that was sold off to Cingular and them merged in with them.

    • Re:Letter (Score:4, Interesting)

      by daeg ( 828071 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:46AM (#18167332)
      I hate the spam I get from Cingular. I've called several times about it, replied back with "STOP" like they tell me to, all to no avail.

      Cingular even refuses to turn my text messaging off (I never use it, I hate text messages).

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by tighr ( 793277 )

        Cingular even refuses to turn my text messaging off (I never use it, I hate text messages).

        Really? Because Cingular refused to turn my text messages on under my old plan if I called them up. For the longest time, I'd have people saying to me, "didn't you get my text? We went to a movie or blah blah" when Cingular never delivered them. I've never been a big text messager, but I figure I should at least read what my friends are sending to me. The good thing was that I never paid for these non-existant text messages.

        The problem fixed itself when I cancelled that plan to start a new plan whe

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by maxume ( 22995 )
          Perhaps she is somehow getting the messages that you missed earlier?

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by tighr ( 793277 )
            My idea of a useful text message is one that conveys the most information in a short amount of time. If I'm paying 10-15 cents for it, and I have a certain amount of allowed characters, I might as well use it. So I'll send something like, "Hey, are you going to be free tonight, and do you want to go out somewhere? You pick, I'll meet you there." Then I'll get a response back saying "Yes", which conveys to me very little amounts of information. So now I've got to send a follow up to clarify more information.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Phroggy ( 441 ) *
        That's interesting, I've been with Cingular for about a year and a half and haven't had a problem. I honestly don't remember for sure if I've ever gotten spam from them - if I have, it certainly hasn't been more than 3 or 4 times, total.

  • HOWTO:Avoid Text Messaging Spam (Score:3, Informative)

    by wiredog ( 43288 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @10:38AM (#18167220) Journal
    Have your cell carrier turn off text messaging on your account. Worked for me.
    • But then of course there are people who actually use test messaging. They get the spam...and lose the amount of legit txt's they can get. I mean, it's only a small cost, but it's still annoying.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by KDR_11k ( 778916 )
      Great idea, could just as well disable the sound your cellphone makes when you get a message and ignore them.
    • And have your ISP turn off email for your account, you won't get any regular spam either.
      • I've actually considered doing something like that.. simple not doing email anymore, and using the various IM screen names I have... faster, more reliable, and less spam...

  • Mr two faced system (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I wonder how harsher the sentence would be if it was some "hacker" kid who was sending the spam.

    $200,000 seems pretty cheap for a computer crime, He should have got life in jail and a $1,000,000 fine.
  • company that has developed a reputation for going after spammers.

    That's a good reason to be a Verizon customer. Didn't they also fight the RIAA as much as they could about turning over Internet subscriber information?

  • Verizon now has an injunction against the Marketing firm, another win for a company that has developed a reputation for going after spammers."

    Good for Verizon. But what about the peasants who use Verizon? I got a wrong-number text message once (no texting in my plan, I have to pay 10cents per tet received), and Verizon made me pay for it. OK, only a few cents, but a few cents times how many wrong numbers or spams can add up to some nice income for Verizon. Do the people receiving these spams have to pay for
  • I know I am being a bit picky but I would be even happier about this if I could get Verizon to give me the service I used to get from my previous provider.

    Examples:
    1) I received an important international call and my Verizon phone dropped it. I tried to call back, only to get a message saying I can't make international calls. I call the Verizon support to add international calling to my plan (already have unlimited data/etc). They told me that even though I paid my phone bill, because I signed up in the las
    • Well ever since they have spent the millions claiming they have the fewest dropped calls you knew they had serious network issues.

      SOP: instead of fixing the problem, lets run an ad campaign saying we dont have a problem

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by B_tace ( 802354 )
        I think its Cingular who claims to have the fewest dropped calls. Verizon claims to have the largest network.
  • So Verizon charges its 100,000 users $10,000 to get spam text messages, then wins $200,000 from the company that sent the spam? Sounds like a win/win...for Verizon.

    • I don't get it... People get charged for receiving text messages in the US? That doesn't make sense to me. In my country, only the sender is charged and I rarely get spam.

      The bottom line is: you should not be charged for something you can't choose not to receive. For instance, you can refuse to answer a phone call when you are in roaming mode if you don't want to pay, but you can't refuse to receive an undesired text message.

      • that is why it is illegal to send unsolicited txt (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        If incoming text messages were free in the US, then Verizon would have lost this lawsuit.

        • Texting in NZ is very cheap. It's free to receive and with most providers, $10 kiwi ($7 US) will allow you to send 500 SMS messages. Texting in NZ is far more popular than calling among the lower and middle class, especially in the teenage group, and because of this, both (yes, we have only two) service providers base a lot of their pre-pay and on-account plans around sending texts.

          Even though SMS messages are so popular, the only advertising I ever receive is from my service provider advertising either c

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by LMacG ( 118321 )
        Mobile phone service and charges rarely make sense in the US. We are charged for making and receiving calls, for sending and receiving text messages, and in general most phones are completely locked down so they can only be used with the provider you bought the phone from.

  • Wait a minute! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jhfry ( 829244 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @12:27PM (#18168684)
    Every time one of this spammer's messages hit my phone I was charged $0.10, and verizon is pursuing damages?... seems like Verizon is double dipping a bit.

    I wonder if they aren't "evil"!

    They could allow a spammer to operate for a significant period of time, increasing revenue from those of us who don't have text messaging on our accounts. Then they shut him down, and get royalties. Finally they look good in everyones eyes, when in reality they made a decent chunk of change for no real work.

    You can't tell me it's that difficult to determine where the messages came from... they probably could have shut him down sooner, but it wasn't worth the effort yet... mostly because they were not getting overwhelmed with calls to have text messaging charges dropped.

    Hmm... I so hate to be one of those conspiracy theorists.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Adambomb ( 118938 ) *
      No tin-foil-hat brand for this one, Its widely accepted in canadian telecomm call centers (not mentioning any names) that this is EXACTLY the strategy behind most spam sms policies.

      Verizon just realized you can push PR at the same time as double dipping as you say =)
      • Caveat: widely accepted might be a bit of hyperbole. It certainly was at the call centers I have worked for, for two of our four major providers here in canada.

  • The 10 Worst Spam Service ISPs (Score:3, Informative)

    by mopflite ( 693070 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @01:58PM (#18169944)
    Guess which ISP is ranked as the world's worst by The Spamhaus Project, in terms of "the few networks who, out of corporate greed or mismanagement, choose to be part of the problem"?

    http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/networks.lasso [spamhaus.org]
    http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/listings.lasso?isp=ver izon.com [spamhaus.org]

    Before rushing to praise Verizon, consider that Verizon are knowingly and unrepentently hosting more of the world's hardcore spam operations than any other network, anywhere in the world.

  • another win for a company that has developed a reputation for going after spammers.

    I had no idea anyone was under the impression that Verizon gave a shit about SMS spam.

    I mean, I know that if you complain to customer service you can get a credit for text spam. But that's not what I need or want. I want a whitelist feature. Not the blacklist that they give you. With only like 15 entries possible. I want a simple whitelist; if it's not my alert server or my girlfriend or my best friend, I don't

  • Only $200,000 ?! Those amoral creeps should have been slapped for several billion!
  • I've probably paid about $1.30 to Verizon over the last year in text fees from spam. I never followed up with it because I imagine spending 5-10 minutes on customer support arguing that I just got charged $0.10 and that it should be reversed. I'm sure I'd also spend 4 minutes of that trying to turn down a plan that includes texting (so I wouldn't have to worry about the once in a while messages.. feh).

    What to do? My time is not worth that phone call, but I'm bothered by the fact that I am paying money to

Slashdot Top Deals

"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup." - H.L. Mencken

Close