Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government The Internet Communications News Your Rights Online

First Spammer Convicted Under CAN-SPAM Law 226

eldavojohn writes "Spammer Jeffrey Brett Goodin has been convicted under the 2003 CAN-SPAM Act, the first person in the U.S. prosecuted successfully under the law. He is facing a sentence of up to 101 years in a federal prison after being found guilty of numerous illegal acts. According to prosecutors, Goodin was convicted on multiple counts in addition to the CAN-SPAM conviction, including wire fraud, unauthorized use of credit cards, misuse of the AOL trademark and attempted witness harassment. From the article: 'The law forbids e-mail marketers from sending false or misleading messages and requires them to provide recipients with a way to opt out of receiving future mailings. During trial, prosecutors presented evidence that Goodin used several compromised Internet accounts to send e-mails to America Online users. The e-mails appeared to be from the company's billing department and told customers to update their billing information or lose service.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First Spammer Convicted Under CAN-SPAM Law

Comments Filter:
  • by countSudoku() ( 1047544 ) on Thursday January 18, 2007 @05:05PM (#17670434) Homepage
    Fix your link! I keep clicking on "CL1cK HERE TO 3NLARGE MALE M3MBER" and nothing happens!!!
  • by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Thursday January 18, 2007 @05:06PM (#17670482) Homepage
    I think so, this is probably a "set an example" type of case. Though it depends on how much money he actually stole; if not a huge amount -- serious criminals even if nobody is killed should get serious punishment, and yes I'm thinking corporate crooks here -- then I'd rather see violent criminals in prison instead of him. But that's just off-the-cuff reaction based on skimming the article.

    Another off-the-cuff reaction: When the mafia lands in court, the witnesses get whacked. How appropriate is it that a spammer can't accomplish any more than witness harassment? I can only imagine his method: Emails stating "Y t3st1fy? Do and no more v14gr4 for U!"
  • by Billosaur ( 927319 ) * <<wgrother> <at> <optonline.net>> on Thursday January 18, 2007 @05:07PM (#17670510) Journal

    100 years is probably excessive -- one night might be sufficient...

    Inmate: What'cha in for, buddy?

    Spammer: I... uh... sent people spam emails... about... male enhancement...

    Inmate: That so?!? Hey fellas! Meet my new b*tch... [grinning]

    Spammer: GUARD!!!!!!!!

  • by i.r.id10t ( 595143 ) on Thursday January 18, 2007 @05:14PM (#17670670)
    ........... And I, I walked over to the, to the bench there, and there is, Group W's
    where they put you if you may not be moral enough to join the army after
    committing your special crime, and there was all kinds of mean nasty ugly
    looking people on the bench there. Mother rapers. Father stabbers. Father
    rapers! Father rapers sitting right there on the bench next to me! And
    they was mean and nasty and ugly and horrible crime-type guys sitting on the
    bench next to me. And the meanest, ugliest, nastiest one, the meanest
    father raper of them all, was coming over to me and he was mean 'n' ugly
    'n' nasty 'n' horrible and all kind of things and he sat down next to me
    and said, "Kid, whad'ya get?" I said, "I didn't get nothing, I had to pay
    $50 and pick up the garbage." He said, "What were you arrested for, kid?"
    And I said, "Littering." And they all moved away from me on the bench
    there, and the hairy eyeball and all kinds of mean nasty things, till I
    said, "And creating a nuisance." And they all came back, shook my hand,
    and we had a great time on the bench, talkin about crime, mother stabbing,
    father raping, all kinds of groovy things that we was talking about on the
    bench. And everything was fine, we was smoking cigarettes and all kinds of
    things, until the Sargeant came over..........
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 18, 2007 @05:18PM (#17670748)
    I think there shouldn't be a maximum sentence. If somebody sends 1 million spams, I think a sentence of 1 million years is fine. We should be working on ways to keep people from escaping this sentence by unfairly dying before they have done their time.
  • by x2A ( 858210 ) on Thursday January 18, 2007 @06:02PM (#17671656)
    "including wire fraud, unauthorized use of credit cards, misuse of the AOL trademark and attempted witness harassment"

    He's being charged with improving their reputation and brand name. Bastard.

  • by x2A ( 858210 ) on Thursday January 18, 2007 @06:08PM (#17671772)
    "Y t3st1fy? Do and no more v14gr4 for U!"

    Yeah but even for that, 100 years is a pretty stiff sentence

  • by x2A ( 858210 ) on Thursday January 18, 2007 @06:24PM (#17672090)
    "I have not read the RTFA, of course"

    Or figured out what the 'RT' stands for :-p

Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.

Working...