Law-wise, I think I have to agree with Len here, and also suggest that naysayers actually download and install the Lycos screensaver to see how it's actually working... AND read their information on "how it works". It's not a specific, dedicated, unrelenting attack against a site from your machine... there is plenty of space between each "hit" to the sites in their database, and it rotates among six or seven sites within the screensaver... it seems highly doubtful you'd get "caught", because from each individual machine, it looks like legitimate traffic. The destination site won't be able to separate the legit traffic from the Lycos screensaver users. To the destination site, it looks more like an overload of legitimate traffic as a result of their "spamvertising efforts".
The law has very little teeth here, it would seem, because they are so ill-prepared to handle such a "problem" for the spammer. They remain just as equally ill-prepared to handle spammers, though spam remains a real serious problem. And with Lycos leaving humans in the equation, manually adding sites to their database of places to get "hit", it's unlikely that "some poor sap" is going to get bombarded. They are checking the spam, and checking the destination site to see if it matches what's in the spam. One malicious user sending out spam "on behalf of your site" would have to really catch the eye of Lycos... the question is, how easy is that? And how easy is it to get removed from Lycos' list? I figure if there's any entity at "risk" with the law, it's probably Lycos... not the end-users. And consider the irony of the law actually protecting the SPAMMER... ewww. Dogs lying down with cats. One would hope that, if proper evidence is presented in a court of law, the spammer would lose, just on the basis of their OWN activity... but who knows, right? Boy, this DOES make you think. I wonder... has anyone asked Lycos these questions... that would seem to be a logical step. Anyone have a contact page for them, for this new "feature" they're offering? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Len Conrad > Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 3:08 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos screensaver tackles spam websites > > > > >I agree this would be great, but the problem with that Len is > that us honest > >people would be caught and prosecuted > > If the law can't be bothered to catch/prosecute spammers, why assume the > law can/will catch/prosecute users of Lycos-type screensavers? > > I say "Lycos-type", because I assume there will be other > screensavers and > even dedicated programs that play this "kill the spamvertiser > websites" game. > > Millions of PCs on subscriber networks are compromised and > abusing all of > us with TB of abuse everyday. Why doesn't the law catch and prosecute > these PC users and network operators, who are at least guilty of > reckless > negligence and malicious interference with our MXs and for unending and > knowing distribution of viruses, ratware, spyware? > > Let's see how the Lycos screensave idea plays out. > > Spamvertizers spam because they can remain anonymous behind the > spammers' > machines and because spamming is cheap. spf is a attempt to reduce > anonymity, but does nothing to raise the cost of spamming. > Shutting down > a spamveritiser website kills the sales channel, which makes > spamming very > expensive. > > Len > > > _____________________________________________________________________ > http://IMGate.MEIway.com : free anti-spam gateway, runs on > 1000's of sites > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
