Who's Next?

[SykkBoy]

There are 10,000 threads on GFY about it, none on the pond, one on DMPM and one here...
we all know about the ftc crackdown and they used can-spam as their means

so, who's next?
tgp's who provide access to free porn?
TGPers who provide free hardcore ponr on their galleries?
search engine gurus who use child-oriented terms (pokemon, harry potter, etc.) to re-direct people to porn sites?

I'm sure this is the tip of the iceberg...
so, who's next?

[Opti]

6 people were convicted today, in part for sending adult spam without the "Expliit Content" header..

People are making a big deal as its the first "porn spam" conviction.

I havent seen a report yet, but heard a radio report.. sounds like these people did a lot more than just omit the "Explicit Content" header....

I know one ass that has totally ignored the can-spam header rules that I would smile to see get taken down though. :redance:

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by Opti@Jan 11 2005, 09:05 PM
6 people were convicted today, in part for sending adult spam without the "Expliit Content" header..

People are making a big deal as its the first "porn spam" conviction.

I havent seen a report yet, but heard a radio report.. sounds like these people did a lot more than just omit the "Explicit Content" header....

I know one ass that has totally ignored the can-spam header rules that I would smile to see get taken down though. :redance:
shhh, I'm trying to stimulate pageviews
and maybe pick up a couple sites cheap ;-)

[Opti]

LOL.. yeah good day to start offering mailer affiliates about 5 bucks a PPS join too most likely! ;-)

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Opti@Jan 11 2005, 09:05 PM
6 people were convicted today, in part for sending adult spam without the "Expliit Content" header..

People are making a big deal as its the first "porn spam" conviction.

I havent seen a report yet, but heard a radio report.. sounds like these people did a lot more than just omit the "Explicit Content" header....

I know one ass that has totally ignored the can-spam header rules that I would smile to see get taken down though. :redance:
Hmmm. I think there's some misinformation on that radio show.

They've only been charged. No conviction.

AOL won $7 million in a spam porn conviction in 2002.

Nicholas Tombros was convicted of spamming porn sites by "war spamming" in November.

[Opti]

Maybe... but it's normally a very reliable source as far as radio goes.

http://www.abc.net.au/streaming/newsradio.asx


I didn't hear the entire piece and a web news search didnt seem to show up anything that appeared to be what they spoke of.. i was assuming it was something that had just happened in the last hour or two.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Opti@Jan 11 2005, 09:24 PM
Maybe... but it's normally a very reliable source as far as radio goes.

http://www.abc.net.au/streaming/newsradio.asx


I didn't hear the entire piece and a web news search didnt seem to show up anything that appeared to be what they spoke of.. i was assuming it was something that had just happened in the last hour or two.
I used google. They can't beat that ;-)

[*KK*]

Indeed, Colin. Serving someone with an indictment in a criminal case isn't a slam dunk by any means. The FTC doesn't like to go to court, they like settlements, regardless of the guilt or innocence of the parties they've shined their little red laser light on in the process.

There are two acronyms that one simply doesn't mess with in the states. One is the FTC, the other is the IRS. Even before the Patriot Act and all the other legislation for denying due process in investigations, convening a grand jury would almost always result in an indictment for the allegedly guilty party, no matter what court system they're going to be tried in later.

However, it's probably easier to be on trial for murder and prove reasonable doubt than it is to utilize whatever assets weren't frozen in the sweep to get competent counsel with experience in these matters. First, there aren't really any precedents in a lot of the matters concerning the internet, and the federal, state and locals aren't always looking to set one, since that's a sword that can cut both ways, especially when you are relying on 12 good men and women that might not have a computer or might be more computer savvy than the prosecution or perhaps even the defense.

Add a slow appeals process which can swing either way and frankly, you just don't know how it will turn out. Look at COPA. A magic Eight Ball like we had as kids could have given you just as good an answer to how that would end up when it started years ago.

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by *KK*@Jan 11 2005, 10:24 PM
Indeed, Colin. Serving someone with an indictment in a criminal case isn't a slam dunk by any means. The FTC doesn't like to go to court, they like settlements, regardless of the guilt or innocence of the parties they've shined their little red laser light on in the process.

There are two acronyms that one simply doesn't mess with in the states. One is the FTC, the other is the IRS. Even before the Patriot Act and all the other legislation for denying due process in investigations, convening a grand jury would almost always result in an indictment for the allegedly guilty party, no matter what court system they're going to be tried in later.

However, it's probably easier to be on trial for murder and prove reasonable doubt than it is to utilize whatever assets weren't frozen in the sweep to get competent counsel with experience in these matters. First, there aren't really any precedents in a lot of the matters concerning the internet, and the federal, state and locals aren't always looking to set one, since that's a sword that can cut both ways, especially when you are relying on 12 good men and women that might not have a computer or might be more computer savvy than the prosecution or perhaps even the defense.

Add a slow appeals process which can swing either way and frankly, you just don't know how it will turn out. Look at COPA. A magic Eight Ball like we had as kids could have given you just as good an answer to how that would end up when it started years ago.
yup
IRS and FTC are infinitely scarier than the FBI and CIA...

also, one of the reports I read said their sites were still running because this was to do with their marketing methods, not how they ran their sites

They'll probably end up walking with a fine that's a fraction of what they were making...it'll make for a good headline for the FTC and they don't get pounded in the ass in prison...and the FTC also scare a few of the smaller players out of the game

but, that's all speculation on my part.....

I remember when the telemarketing guys got nailed in the mid-90's
they never saw jailtime, only had their money and such taken away and even then, it wasn't all of the money...

but, to this day, I get shivers thinking of orange stickers on the doors

[Peaches]

Originally posted by *KK*@Jan 11 2005, 11:24 PM
There are two acronyms that one simply doesn't mess with in the states. One is the FTC, the other is the IRS.
I had both of them at my house interviewing me about an old boss who ended up serving time. I have to say it was the most nervous I have EVER been. :unsure: