Slicing off the spam

June 17, 2003 10:48 PM

So... Microsoft sue some spammers.Isn't this an unique case of the nut trying to hit back at the sledgehammer?
posted by apocalypse miaow (10 comments total)

In the future Microsoft will automatically sue you if you use Hotmail to send any of those god damned forwards to more than 10 people.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:52 PM on June 17, 2003

Here is a fine example of Microsoft and SPAM.

If Microsoft can't be bothered to secure its test environement......

Return-Path:
Received: from switch.somehost.com ([unix socket])
by switch.somehost.com (Cyrus v2.1.11) with LMTP; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 0
4:25:32 -0600
X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
Return-Path:
Received: from HMT3-CLT1.hotmailtest3.com (hmt3-clt1.hotmailtest3.com [64.4.7.32
])
by switch.somehost.com (8.12.8/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h24APV1C029223
for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 04:25:31 -0600 (CST)
(envelope-from [e-mail])
Received: from mail.nootede.nl ([61.11.79.215]) by HMT3-CLT1.hotmailtest3.com wi
th Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4821);
Tue, 4 Mar 2003 02:38:55 -0800
Message-ID: <0 [e-mail]>
To:
From: "Life Savings"
Subject: Life Insurance up to 75% Off. Get a FREE Quote Now! 7
983
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 02:33:09 -2000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Mar 2003 10:39:01.0196 (UTC) FILETIME=[44E9F8C0:01C2E2
3A]


posted by rough ashlar at 10:56 PM on June 17, 2003

You'd think they would spend a few billion on making some half-decent spam filtering software, huh?

Nope.
Not Microsoft.
posted by cinderful at 11:45 PM on June 17, 2003

I don't care.
posted by ed\26h at 1:24 AM on June 18, 2003

The same day, Microsoft and other Internet service providers fought against a bill in California that would require companies to get permission from computer users before sending them unsolicited e-mail ads.

"We don't think all commercial e-mail should be banned,'' said Tim Cranton, Microsoft senior corporate attorney. Microsoft favors self regulation by the industry "to establish standards that can evolve over time".
posted by magullo at 2:05 AM on June 18, 2003

In the future Microsoft will automatically sue you if you use Hotmail to send any of those god damned forwards to more than 10 people.

Gawd, I *wish*. If only someone would sue my in-laws for forwarding me those stupid prayer-list chain e-mails.
posted by MrBaliHai at 4:42 AM on June 18, 2003

AOL has been suing spammers pretty successfully for a while now under a variety of federal and state laws. The biggest problem is that it is so easy to become a spammer, more just pop up to take the place of the ones that the ISPs put out of business through litigation.

Personally, I think individual users should start trying to sue spammers under RICO. Seriously. All you need is a pattern or practice of racketeering activity over time. Since most spam is fraudulent in one way or another, it could probably qualify as wire fraud, a qualifying racketeering activity under RICO.

Of course, you could only recover damages based on the harm you've suffered from receiving the spam, but hey, you get three times cost of the actual harm. And there's always class actions.
posted by boltman at 7:07 AM on June 18, 2003

Yeah, but it's Microsoft - remember, Microsoft-bashing is fashionable right now.
posted by FormlessOne at 7:39 AM on June 18, 2003

Microsoft favors self regulation by the industry "to establish standards that can evolve over time".

In other words, we want to set the standards.
posted by moonbiter at 7:46 AM on June 18, 2003

Microsoft-bashing is fashionable right now

Perhaps you would care to explain the banality behind it all?
posted by magullo at 9:12 AM on June 18, 2003