* jdow wrote (14/05/06 02:09):
From: Gary W. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On another paw, Craig, do consider who is the injured party. Marc is
not. The final recipient, the addressee, is an injured party for the
spam in her mailbox. The addressee's ISP is also an injured party due
to the
On Friday, May 12th 2006 at 18:37 -0700, quoth Marc Perkel:
=So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously considering it. I
=hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it and I do front end spam
=filtering for about 500 domains. I'm wondering, is there any reason why I
jdow wrote:
From: Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jdow wrote:
Well, Marc would have a really hard time proving HE was injured by the
spam. Therefore seeing would be annoyingly unproductive for HIM. But
the ISPs forced to hire him could sue and win. (Collecting might be
quite another kettle of
jdow wrote:
From: Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mouss wrote:
Rick Measham wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
... I'm wondering if I
make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
free just to get the spam to sue for.
Scott Warren wrote:
You ask this like you know who the spammers are and where to find
them. If this is the case and spammers are that easy to find, why are
we not reading more articles like the one where a spammer in the
former Soviet Republic was found beaten to death in his apartment??
One gets the idea that many in this thread have had little experience
of litigation. I don't know about the US, but in the UK, you're
talking *many* months and much paperwork. That being said. I'm so up
for suing the SOB's ... hit em where it hurts.
A small addendum, once a private prosecution
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
One gets the idea that many in this thread have had little experience
of litigation. I don't know about the US, but in the UK, you're
talking *many* months and much paperwork. That being said. I'm so up
for suing the SOB's ... hit em where it hurts.
A small addendum,
: John Rudd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: SpamAssassin Users users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 18:51
Subject: Re: Suing Spammers
If it works, let me know ... and let me know the name of your lawyer :-)
Cuz, I'd jump on that bandwagon in a heart beat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marc Perkel wrote:
So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously considering
it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it and I do front
end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm wondering, is there any
reason why I
Some of the state laws in the U.S. are stronger than the Federal Government's
laws.
In Georgia where I live, there is a pretty good law for this type of thing:
http://www.gov.state.ga.us/press/2005/press765.shtml
Now, interestingly, I've recently taken on several different law firms as mail
From: Craig McLean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marc Perkel wrote:
So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously considering
it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who specializes in it and I do front
end spam filtering for about 500 domains. I'm
From: Rob McEwen (PowerView Systems) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Some of the state laws in the U.S. are stronger than the Federal Government's
laws.
In Georgia where I live, there is a pretty good law for this type of thing:
http://www.gov.state.ga.us/press/2005/press765.shtml
Now, interestingly,
On another paw, Craig, do consider who is the injured party. Marc is
not. The final recipient, the addressee, is an injured party for the
spam in her mailbox. The addressee's ISP is also an injured party due
to the (vastly) increased mail volume her servers must handle. They
have a tort
Craig McLean wrote on Sat, 13 May 2006 14:18:31 +0100:
http://spamlegalaction.pbwiki.com/
Rules in CA might be a little different, but the principle is likely to
be the same..
Just that you don't get hold of the nasty spammers. And the nice
spammers are easily blocked.
Kai
--
Kai
jdow wrote:
Well, Marc would have a really hard time proving HE was injured by the
spam. Therefore seeing would be annoyingly unproductive for HIM. But
the ISPs forced to hire him could sue and win. (Collecting might be
quite another kettle of French fried worms.)
I don't have to prove
I thought CAN-SPAM preempted all state's laws.(?)
Robert Braver wrote:
On Saturday, May 13, 2006, 8:46:46 AM, Rob McEwen wrote:
RMPS Add all this up and I'm quite sure that they had to be
RMPS violating that law in Georgia.
I may have missed something - what would be violative of CAN-SPAM
Rick Measham wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
... I'm wondering if I
make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
free just to get the spam to sue for.
Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
To be completely cynical, you're
mouss wrote:
Rick Measham wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
... I'm wondering if I
make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
free just to get the spam to sue for.
Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
To be completely
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Craig McLean wrote on Sat, 13 May 2006 14:18:31 +0100:
http://spamlegalaction.pbwiki.com/
Rules in CA might be a little different, but the principle is likely to
be the same..
Just that you don't get hold of the nasty spammers. And the nice
spammers are easily
So a good rule of thumb is that since I'm legit, I follow CAN-SPAM.
Real spammers have to contend with state laws too.
Rob
Robert Braver wrote:
On Saturday, May 13, 2006, 4:55:48 PM, Bronto wrote:
B I thought CAN-SPAM preempted all state's laws.(?)
CAN-SPAM does not preempt state laws to
From: Gary W. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On another paw, Craig, do consider who is the injured party. Marc is
not. The final recipient, the addressee, is an injured party for the
spam in her mailbox. The addressee's ISP is also an injured party due
to the (vastly) increased mail volume her servers
From: Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jdow wrote:
Well, Marc would have a really hard time proving HE was injured by the
spam. Therefore seeing would be annoyingly unproductive for HIM. But
the ISPs forced to hire him could sue and win. (Collecting might be
quite another kettle of French fried
From: Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mouss wrote:
Rick Measham wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
... I'm wondering if I
make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
free just to get the spam to sue for.
Someone tell
You ask this like you know who the spammers are and where to find
them. If this is the case and spammers are that easy to find, why
are we not reading more articles like the one where a spammer in the
former Soviet Republic was found beaten to death in his apartment??
Sure, sue them if
If it works, let me know ... and let me know the name of your lawyer :-)
Cuz, I'd jump on that bandwagon in a heart beat...
On May 12, 2006, at 18:37, Marc Perkel wrote:
So - has anyone here actually sued a spammer? I'm seriously
considering it. I hooked up with a lawyer today who
Marc Perkel wrote:
... I do front
end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
... I'm wondering if I
make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for free
just to get the spam to sue for.
Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
To be completely cynical, you're nuts.
If you're in
Rick Measham wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
... I do front end spam filtering for about 500 domains.
... I'm wondering if I
make enough money suing spammers I could give my services away for
free just to get the spam to sue for.
Someone tell me if I'm nuts?
To be completely cynical, you're
27 matches
Mail list logo