p2pnet - rss feed: Microsoft vs sex spammers
p2pnet.net News:- With Lycos launching its own unique anti-spam campaign, Microsoft has filed seven John Doe lawsuits against people it says used zombie computers to send sexually explicit spam that violated America’s CAN-SPAM (Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing) law.
“Spam that contains sexually oriented content that is initially viewable in the e-mail violates provisions known as ‘brown paper wrapper’ in the CAN-SPAM law and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rules,” says Microsoft.
“The labeling provisions require sexually oriented e-mail solicitations to include the label “SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT:” in both the subject line and the initially viewable area of an e-mail message.”
The lawsuits allege CAN-SPAM and Washington state Commercial Electronic Mail Act violations, “including using compromised computers around the world to route spam email messages, using misleading subject lines, and failing to include an unsubscribe option and physical address,” says Microsoft.
It says as well as yesterday’s suits, it also filed against another ‘John Doe’on November 12 who was, “soliciting, among other things, Korean-language adult-oriented Web sites,” it states.
===================
See:-
unique - Spam the spammers: Lycos, p2pnet, December 2, 2004
brown paper wrapper - Microsoft Sues Spammers Who Violate CAN-SPAM “Brown Paper Wrapper” Rule, Microsoft, December 2, 2004
December 3rd, 2004 at 2:12 am
All of the content of Playboy’s Internet Sites are on the Servers of RealNetworks, Inc. — RealNetworks had a Booth at the Porn convention last July in Las Vegas Looking for more Porn to send out over the Internet — How many people that you know, who are opposed to pornography on the Internet support RNWK by having RealNetworks Products on their computer — Should they be told that RealNetworks is a purveyor of porn…f
Floyd Burns
burnsamerican@aol.com
December 3rd, 2004 at 4:11 pm
How do they know the identity of the real sender of e-mail if they are using compromised computers?
Wouldn’t spammers remove logs of their ill doings?
Did they set up false compromised computers to trap spammers?
How they found the alleged spammer is probably as interesting if not more so than the result of the lawsuit.