Gosh, I too came into this thread thinking it would be about how nine years isn’t enough.
A couple of years back I read that a small group of people (maybe half a dozen) are responsible for most of the world’s spam. And an unbidden though flickered across my brain…“Couldn’t we just kill them all, then?”
Now, I would not seriously push for legislation to allow the death penalty for spam barons. I don’t even support the death penalty, and would be perfectly happy to see it abolished. But were some freak accident to wipe out the world’s spam barons and leave everyone else unharmed, I don’t think I’d feel very sad about it.
These people don’t just irritate millions with their stupid unwanted ads for various worthless products. They crash entire mail servers. They’re a monkeywrench in the entire e-mail system. They’re worse than parasites, and I don’t think nine years in some minimum security prison is too harsh for them.
Did I read the article right? The conviction was for the spamming only, not for the fraud itself. He’s still open for prosecution for the fraud? That’s where the fines or the cash awards should happen. I wonder if there’s any chance of that happening? It would have to be a class action suit, I guess.
As to the spamming. If he got one minute for each hour of deletion time that he caused other people, he’d be getting more than the nine years that’s been recommended. Is there any kind of online petition going to be presented as a friend of the court document recommending that the judge NOT reduce the sentence? I’d sign that.
He should pay back all the money he earned from spamming itself (sales of mailing lists, for instance). Any money earned from fraudulent product sales is a separate issue… although I hope he gets it for that as well. His spam mailing lists, spammer software, etc, should become property of the IETF or something, to be used somehow in the construction of a stronger anti-spam system.
He should definitely be required to spill all he knows about the spam ‘industry’ and other spammers, with the goal of identifying other spammers and documenting their acts.
Being kept away from the net (and possibly all computers) for five years after his release from prison would be good too. Let him be the only one in his new post-prison job to have to deposit a paycheque by hand, and not be able to use a credit or debit card, or pay bills by online banking.
Nine years seems harsh, but I’m all for it if it acts as a deterrent. It seems to me that 90 percent of spammers will never be caught; but they might see this case, think “Nine years?!” and stop doing it.
