<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: War Against Spammers Takes a Step Backward</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/2008/09/14/war-against-spammers-takes-a-step-backward/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/2008/09/14/war-against-spammers-takes-a-step-backward/</link>
	<description>Your premium source for custom modification services for phpBB</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 18:09:31 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Micheal</title>
		<link>http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/2008/09/14/war-against-spammers-takes-a-step-backward/comment-page-1/#comment-2832</link>
		<dc:creator>Micheal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:22:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/?p=266#comment-2832</guid>
		<description>Dave: Yeah, after I posted I looked at the article. Still, I don&#039;t see how freedom of speech could even apply in this case. That sets a very, very, very bad precedent, and I&#039;m disappointed in Virginia.

dogs and things: At an underground spammer site I used to frequent, spammers were commenting about how they and their friends were moving out of the US because of the laws. Sadly once out of the US, there is little that can be done except tear down their servers and such.

Another problem is that there are, believe it or not, ISPs that will actually cover for the spammer. One such example was when I filed abuse reports to Geocities and a certain unnamed ISP in the UK about Robert Soloway. Geocities immediately did the takedown and thanked me. The ISP in the UK, however, did not. Quite the opposite actually. They basically asked me to not send them reports like that, as how the person operates their computer is up to them, even if that operation meant spam. I could not get through to them the fact that a) Robert Soloway was using their services for spam, b) for fraud (this particular campaign involved wire fraud), and c) the computer in question was actually compromised, or at least appeared to be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave: Yeah, after I posted I looked at the article. Still, I don&#8217;t see how freedom of speech could even apply in this case. That sets a very, very, very bad precedent, and I&#8217;m disappointed in Virginia.</p>
<p>dogs and things: At an underground spammer site I used to frequent, spammers were commenting about how they and their friends were moving out of the US because of the laws. Sadly once out of the US, there is little that can be done except tear down their servers and such.</p>
<p>Another problem is that there are, believe it or not, ISPs that will actually cover for the spammer. One such example was when I filed abuse reports to Geocities and a certain unnamed ISP in the UK about Robert Soloway. Geocities immediately did the takedown and thanked me. The ISP in the UK, however, did not. Quite the opposite actually. They basically asked me to not send them reports like that, as how the person operates their computer is up to them, even if that operation meant spam. I could not get through to them the fact that a) Robert Soloway was using their services for spam, b) for fraud (this particular campaign involved wire fraud), and c) the computer in question was actually compromised, or at least appeared to be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dogs and things</title>
		<link>http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/2008/09/14/war-against-spammers-takes-a-step-backward/comment-page-1/#comment-2831</link>
		<dc:creator>dogs and things</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Sep 2008 21:19:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/?p=266#comment-2831</guid>
		<description>It seems rediculous to me that at this point in time thereÂ´s still no effective anti-spam law in place in that part of the world. That being said I donÂ´t even know what the anti-spam laws in my country of residence, Spain, are like.

ItÂ´s a shame an internet-pig like this guy gets away with everything, this case must have scared the sh*t out of his fellow spammers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems rediculous to me that at this point in time thereÂ´s still no effective anti-spam law in place in that part of the world. That being said I donÂ´t even know what the anti-spam laws in my country of residence, Spain, are like.</p>
<p>ItÂ´s a shame an internet-pig like this guy gets away with everything, this case must have scared the sh*t out of his fellow spammers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Rathbun</title>
		<link>http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/2008/09/14/war-against-spammers-takes-a-step-backward/comment-page-1/#comment-2830</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Rathbun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Sep 2008 20:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/?p=266#comment-2830</guid>
		<description>Hi, Micheal, you raise some valid points. I think the main point of the court ruling is that the law itself is the problem. Since he was convicted under the law as it was then written, and that law has now been stricken from the books, his conviction is by default revoked as well. By the way, his sister was also arrested but didn&#039;t do any jail time; I think she was fined a whopping $7500 or something like that. The Wiki article contains more details.

So in this case, the intent of the law is something that I think we all want, but the scope of the law was called into question and resulted in it being overturned.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Micheal, you raise some valid points. I think the main point of the court ruling is that the law itself is the problem. Since he was convicted under the law as it was then written, and that law has now been stricken from the books, his conviction is by default revoked as well. By the way, his sister was also arrested but didn&#8217;t do any jail time; I think she was fined a whopping $7500 or something like that. The Wiki article contains more details.</p>
<p>So in this case, the intent of the law is something that I think we all want, but the scope of the law was called into question and resulted in it being overturned.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Micheal</title>
		<link>http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/2008/09/14/war-against-spammers-takes-a-step-backward/comment-page-1/#comment-2829</link>
		<dc:creator>Micheal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:09:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phpbbdoctor.com/blog/?p=266#comment-2829</guid>
		<description>I thought this sounded familiar. Though I thought he and his sister were both arrested. At any rate, at the time, Virginia had one of the toughest SPAM laws in the nation and they were proud of that. What about my freedom to have my inbox free of his filth? What about my freedom of speech when I say I don&#039;t want spammers to be free? I think the justices need a bop on the head. Because you said, there was actually a mountain of evidence against him, and they are letting him out on freedom of speech? Whatever happened to &quot;your right to freedom of speech ends at my nose?&quot; His right to freedom of speech ended when he sent out millions of spam messages.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought this sounded familiar. Though I thought he and his sister were both arrested. At any rate, at the time, Virginia had one of the toughest SPAM laws in the nation and they were proud of that. What about my freedom to have my inbox free of his filth? What about my freedom of speech when I say I don&#8217;t want spammers to be free? I think the justices need a bop on the head. Because you said, there was actually a mountain of evidence against him, and they are letting him out on freedom of speech? Whatever happened to &#8220;your right to freedom of speech ends at my nose?&#8221; His right to freedom of speech ended when he sent out millions of spam messages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
