How Would You Sentence A Convicted Spammer?

from the what-makes-sense? dept

Wed, Jul 16th 2008 9:44am — Mike Masnick

We've covered some of the case against spammer Robert Soloway. He was arrested back in May of 2007 on criminal (rather than civil) charges. He'd already lost multimillion dollar civil lawsuits from Microsoft and an ISP. He hadn't paid a dime of what he owed. Instead, he just kept on spamming. When he was arrested, of course, officials claimed that it would have an immediate impact on spam -- but it doesn't seem like spam has decreased at all. Earlier this year, Soloway pleaded guilty, and now the judge in the case is struggling over what the sentence should be, noting that there's little to compare it to that may be appropriate (her closest approximation: a polluter).

Of course, Soloway is hardly the first spammer to receive a jail sentence. A few years back Jeremy Jaynes received nine years in jail for spamming. This certainly seemed excessive, no matter how much you hate spam. It seems like there would be better ways to punish spammers than give them sentences worse than some violent offenders. And, of course, for all the talk about how these long sentences would deter spammers, the only thing it seems to have deterred is their willingness to so openly brag about their achievements. There's more spam than ever before and it's harder than ever to track the spammers down. So, are there more creative ideas for how Soloway should be dealt with beyond just locking him up? Update In related news, another spammer has just been given 30 months in jail.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: email, sentencing, spam

68 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

technomage (profile), 16 Jul 2008 @ 9:50am

sentence
most unlucky hackers are usually barred from electronic devices for a period of time, as well as some institutionalization. Spammers should be classified as something similar, and have the tools of the trade removed from them for a length of time, and then only returned when they can show rehabilitation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JS Beckerist, 17 Jul 2008 @ 5:40am
  
  Re: sentence
  I believe that if a volume could be determined, than the spammer should be forced to pay per email sent. If they can't pay the fine, a "time per dime" jail sentence should do.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wraith, 16 Jul 2008 @ 9:58am

Spam and water for 20 years. And I don't mean the meat stuff I mean the printed spam emails.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Tony, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:44am
  
  Re:
  Yes, the printed stuff. Forcing someone to eat the processed meat-flavored food product for 20 years would be cruel and unusual.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anthony, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:24am
    
    Re: Re:
    he means paper with spam on it
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anthony, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:23am
  
  Re:
  I like this one
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blue, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:02am

Earnestly, he should get jail time NOT for spamming, BUT for failure to pay the prior fines.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anti-spam, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:04am

Justice
I'm so biased against spammers, I'd propose a sentence that would probably violate the 8th amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment:

Solway should be force to read —aloud, just so we know he's really reading— every single piece of spam that he ever sent. Every single spam. Every one. Read 'em and weep.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- asdf, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:16am
  
  Re: Justice
  but who is the poor fool that gets to listen?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - anti-spam, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:40am
    
    Re: Re: Justice
    
    Solway should be force to read —aloud, just so we know he's really reading— every single piece of spam that he ever sent. Every single spam. Every one. Read 'em and weep.
    but who is the poor fool that gets to listen?
    
    Oh, we'll get a machine to do the listening part.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Valkor, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:22am
  
  Re: Justice
  I'm definitely thinking of things that are both cruel *and* unusual. Most of them involve him being violated or having pain inflicted on him just once by every person who ever received a spam from him.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - anti-spam, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:39am
    
    Re: Re: Justice
    I'm definitely thinking of things that are both cruel *and* unusual. Most of them involve him being violated or having pain inflicted on him just once by every person who ever received a spam from him.
    
    How does lashing him with a wet noodle sound? Sentence him to be lashed with a wet noodle one-hundred million times...
    
    Or slapping him on the wrist? Maybe that's even better... Slap him on one wrist fifty million times or so, and then slap his other wrist fifty million times.
    
    (There about over a billion people on the 'net these days, and 10% seems like a good, rough estimate of the number of people Solway's spammed.)
    
    Really, any proportional sentence is going to violate the eighth amendment. So instead his sentence must be calculated strictly with an eye pour encourager les autres. IOW, the sentence should be based on deterrent effect only.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
William, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:04am

I would...
I would just have it so that he HAS to give the government his email address. Then the government would spam the crap out of him. And if he doesn't give the government the email address hes using regularly then he gets a year in jail or so.

The reason i say only a year is because spam is annoying but can be dealt with pretty easy. I get 1,000+ spam emails a day and i just block each one separately, and now about 95% of them go to the spam folder. And with almost every single email provider having a spam blocker of some kind, it's even less of a problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Disgruntled, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:55am
  
  Re: I would...
  Forgive me for pointing out the obvious, but one clear spamming method is to spoof the e-mail address the spam was coming from. So, what you have admitted to be doing appears to be blocking completely innocent individual e-mail addresses, with the hope of it solving your spam problem? I see gaping flaws in your logic.
  
  With over 1,000 spam e-mails a day, I would suggest that you attempt to learn what behavior you are exhibiting which promotes that level of spam. You might also go through your block list and make a few apologies to those persons who were blocked for no real reason.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
zota, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:06am

better sentence
Parole: five years inner city graffiti abatement and trash pickup, 8 hours a day.

They can live at home (saving the state money) and they can have a computer. But as a condition of their parole, the computer must be at least 5 years old, their internet connection must be 56k or slower, and they must use an email account without spam filters of any kind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- David, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:11am
  
  Re: better sentence
  I like this one!!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Peet McKimmie (profile), 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:07am

Excessive? 9 Years? Not at all.
While the impact of an individual SPAM message is less than that of being a victim of violence you must remember to multiply this by the number of offences.

I would sentence egregious and repeated SPAMming with no hint of remorse on a par with manslaughter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
gryphon84, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:11am

spammers should get some time behind bars, but after they're out take away their technology, computers etc. so they ca't spam again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:15am

Given that less than 3% of all mail hitting our gateway is legitimate, the rest being mostly spam and some viral mail, I'd say 9 years isn't excessive to me at all.

From an administrative standpoint, there's a significant overhead cost associated with this that by far trumps the inconvenience of receiving spam as an end user.

One could argue that even without the costs added in, spam is on the same level as harassment. Let's just convict him of 9 million counts of harassment, make him serve each sentence after the next and be done with him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Haywood, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:16am

house arrest with no internet
House arrest 1 year with no internet for life, suspended life sentence as a basis. Get caught on the internet once and the full impact of the sentence would be restored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
asdf, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:18am

I think this just falls under computer crime. Take away their tech, and be done with it. Don't waste tax dollars on these morons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:20am

white collar prison or federal pound me in the ass prison?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:20am

What ever happened to spam filters? I think I have received a total of 2 spam messages sense I have switched to gmail many moons ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:41am
  
  Re: Whatever happened to spam filters
  Have you checked your filtered spam? My filters have been carefully tuned and most of my contacts are whitelisted, and still, spam gets through, and legitimate messages are lost.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Old Guy, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:13am
  
  Re:
  "What ever happened to spam filters? I think I have received a total of 2 spam messages sense I have switched to gmail many moons ago."
  
  I think you may have hit on a way to have the punishment fit the crime. Make him work as a human spam filter for the next 5 years or so. He could work for one of the many large charity organizations. He would, for example, be responsible for personally examining EVERY piece of mail that comes into the United Way.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
chris (profile), 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:22am

make them work for the goodguys
wheny ou get busted for something that the government can't prevent or even understand, you should be sentenced to work for the government at minimum wage. the fbi did it with an identity thief and i think it had some real effect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:25am

Appropriate punishment
Since it takes time to review and delete the spam, how about he serves 10 seconds for each spam message! Seems fair to me. So is he sent messages to 1,000,000 people he should serve 100,000 minutes in prison or just under 2 years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ehrichweiss, 16 Jul 2008 @ 3:11pm
  
  Re: Appropriate punishment
  Your math is off. 0.1 minutes is 6 seconds, not 10.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tim, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:32am

I HATE SPAMMERS
There is not enough punishment for spammners. I think it starts with cutting off their fingers and then it gets worse from there...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bruce, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:33am

Punishment
Put him to work tracking down other spammers. Sentence each new spammer caught to do the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Leroy, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:36am

penalty for spamming
Death Penalty for him and his family. More right to execution, no appeal, no waiting period. Make it public, put it on world-wide TV. This would have a chilling effect on spammers world-wide.

(this is not intended to be taken seriously)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:59am
  
  Re: penalty for spamming
  But your idea should be taken seriously. It's the right one. Screw ethics, it comes down to a matter of if a dirty spammer deserves to live. The answer is clear. In the words of Mortal Kombat...
  
  FINISH HIM!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alex, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:37am

Zota (#6) has the right idea. Jail should be reserved for dangerous/flight-risk offenders. There are cheaper, more effective ways to deal with crime
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:07pm
  
  Re: Alex
  This specific man IS a flight risk. He's been given multiple fines, and fled without paying them
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bink, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:38am

Let it fit
I get about 10,000 spam a day and it is increasing at an alarming rate.

It would please me if the convicted spammer could be sent to jail where he would be allowed the use of a computer which has its outgoing services disabled. Then he should be required to collect 365 Get Out of Jail tokens from email messages which will be buried, one per day, in as much spam as he is convicted of having sent. This means he must sort through thousands or perhaps millions of useless messages, and find the one gem in the pile, day after day, just as I have to do. Perhaps there could even be a webcam and a site showing the spammers at work.

If he is diligent, he can secure his release in a year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AJ, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:41am

CAN SPAM
I'd be MORE than happy to buy a silver bullet to put in this guy. Seriously, they're like child molesters... once hooked, they're never cured. He'll always keep coming back -- think Fatal Attraction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disgruntled, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:47am

Not paying court-mandated fines: Jail, and plenty of comparable court evidence on that subject.

Spamming: Mandatory work for an allotted period of time to identify address farming, spam filter avoiding and spam technique methods with a government agency to come up with a comprehensive methodology of dealing with eliminating spam. (reference: Frank Abagnale Jr.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Disgruntled, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:59am
  
  Re:
  One additional point: There is plenty of evidence of "computer criminals" having their computer access restricted after their jailtime (reference: Kevin Mitnik). If this were to be enforced, I would hope to see the spammer not able to own or access any computer, including PCs, laptops, Internet-enabled cell phones, smart-appliances, etc. Depending on the judge, make him bank at tellers and forbid him from using an ATM machine.
  
  Make him suffer without his luxuries, and maybe THAT will curb his willingness to abuse and lose them all again.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Johnny Canada, 16 Jul 2008 @ 10:57am

1 day in jail for each spam mail sent.

Oh and as this is a computer crime, like Hacking, he is a threat to National Security so off to Gitmo for him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gary, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:05am

Death by hanging until dead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Huh?, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:11am

The War on Spam
Well looking at this from the point of view of the State, I would think they would want to hire him to spread propaganda. Of course the government isn't that efficient, so they will probably just rob the tax payers of more of the fruit of their labors so they can put him in prison for a prolonged period. Plus the State will most likely let a murder or rapist out early to make room. The only thing more wastefull than the war on spam is the war on drugs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Formerly Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:11am

A Fair punishment idea
1. Fine the spammer enough to make spamming cost more than it is worth. (already done)
2. If the fined party does not pay assigned fines within a specified time, they go to jail and earn current labor rates (about $1/day atm) to pay off their fine.
3. Parole or release for good behavior etc... under the condition that the next missed payment on the fine will put you back in prison.
4. Further convictions put you back in jail just like missing payments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alex, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:18am

Exile/Death/Public Flogging
These people are refuse.

Think about it. They're actively trying to cheat people, get around tons of preventative measures people have put in place to do so. They are garbage. I just want them gone, I don't care how.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aim, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:20am

Who pays the spammer and why don't we persue those who hire spammers? Close the market on spam!... then, no spamER.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WarOtter (profile), 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:25am

In a perfect world..
In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penisses, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship.

Copied from Bash
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jonnyq, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:25am

Misleading spam should be punished the same as any other false advertising. Scamming should be punished just like any other non-computer related scam. Anything left - truthful advertisements for legal products, even if they're v1agra - should not be punished, or at worst, punished the same way as unsolicited snail mail is punished (it's usually not).

The fact is that our system of email is too open to abuse. We should be fixing the protocol, and not jailing the people that abuse an easily abused system. Any punishment they do receive should be the result of OTHER laws they're breaking, such as scamming, hacking and false advertisement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Beta, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:09pm
  
  Re:
  I completely agree. It's easy to send spam that can't be traced, so punishing a spammer won't change the ambient spam levels, so there's really no point (except exacting revenge on one for the bad behavior of many, which I think society shouldn't do).
  
  There are much better countermeasures than spam filters, and when we're ready we'll start using them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
James, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:34am

death by firing squad...
...starting at the kneecaps and working their way up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jono, 16 Jul 2008 @ 11:49am

Fines and community service
Yes money is spent blocking spam, but spammers shouldn't get jail time if no one was hurt. THe guy obviously has a skill that could easily be converted to something a little more useful in society.

The ones that should be severely punished are the ones paying the spammer to spam and have knowledge that it's occurring. They can't even claim ignorance, if everyone gets the spam then at some point the seller is going to get their own spam.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Peet McKimmie (profile), 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:02pm
  
  Re: Fines and community service
  THe guy obviously has a skill that could easily be converted to something a little more useful in society.
  
  Chances are that the guy in the dock is a mediocre manager at best who anonymously hired a squad of programmers. Would you really consider more managers useful?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Georgy, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:01pm

and the most appropriate punishment is....
.. make him my butler :)

Spam hasn't killed anybody. Just fine him and let him go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mojo, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:05pm

I agree that jail time should be a last resort - remember, it costs us money to keep people behind bars, and for every non-violent person in jail, someone who SHOULD be there will walk due to overcrowding.

Barring them from computer access will hurt them most; it will be worse than jail time for them and they'll be forced to earn a living the hard way.

In this day and age, taking away computer access is a very severe punnishment - especially for someone who's life revolved around it.

Make them pay restitution and save the jail time for only if they violate sentencing terms (i.e. are caught using a computer).

Any would-be spammer would think twice about how they make a living if they knew their computer access would be taken away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Peet McKimmie (profile), 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:15pm
  
  Re:
  Barring them from computer access will hurt them most
  
  As I commented upthread, the guy who has been caught and is in the dock is most likely a middle-manager type who hired programmers anonymously to write a "turnkey" system. He could keep on running this from a simple office with a typewriter and a 'phone. Everyone assumes the person who got caught was some sort of "super-hacker". He wasn't, necessarily - he ran the company. Despite popular preconceptions it's still possible to run a company without a computer.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John (profile), 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:06pm

Punishment
To posters #2 and #11:
I think forcing the spammer to read every single one of his e-mails is a great punishment. Even make him read the ones that are garbage and nonsense characters.

Who should listen? How about his parents, for starters. Let them hear how their son is sending out spam for "Canadian drugs" and other unmentionables.

Then have him read the spam e-mails to his kids? You say the kids are too young to hear about x-rated porn spam? Too bad- that's what their daddy does.

Maybe the he should go into a school and talk about spam e-mails on the "What my father does for a living" day. Then, he should read every spam e-mail until the teacher decides the kids in the class have been traumatized enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simon Green, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:06pm

Appropriate punishment
I'm thinking something out of A Clockwork Orange. You know, strapped to a chair with your eyes jammed open and forced to watch ad after ad after ad for penis enlarging low-fat mortgages approved while you wait, all to the sound of that sweet, sweet, Ludwig Van.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:07pm

Cut his balls off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quaker in a Basement, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:11pm

Sentence?
Handwritten apologies. Millions of 'em.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:13pm

4000+ hours of community service would seen fitting.

And yes - written apologizes to all those he was spamming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:33pm

No internet use for years.
I don't think a lot of jail time is appropriate, but I think banning him from the internet for a long time(years). Then every time he does violate that, put him in jail for an amount of time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:43pm

death by crushing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NR, 16 Jul 2008 @ 12:46pm

He lost a civil suit (big one) and blew it off then was convicted criminally. Do I believe if given the opportunity this man would set up shop immediately and no think twice about it? Yes I do!

He owes money...big money which he can't afford nor pay back if he is jailed. Make him work off the lawsuit...that should keep him busy for the rest of his life!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gates-just-gates, 16 Jul 2008 @ 1:25pm

SPAM
Convicted spammers should be sentenced to work for an open source anti-spam software projet, at minimum wage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You never know, 16 Jul 2008 @ 1:39pm

As a refresher, I posted a bit on Online predators. “When released from jail (with over crowding that won’t take long) the offender would be placed on a international data base.” Now this will take work and cost the government so to offset that cost, Convicted spammers will be have to create and maintain this data base using a tightly restricted ISP/Proxy server so they can not create more spam. In turn they will have to also list their own identity as moderators and answer questions from the parolees on the list and act as the help desk for the listless’. This would all have to take place using their own equipment, and pay the Criminal Listing ISP/Proxy,( the only one they will be allowed to use) thus creating a profit source for the agency created to monitor their progress. I know, it would be in violation of some privacy act created to protect the guilty, but I can dream can't I?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joe, 16 Jul 2008 @ 2:42pm

Punishment is hopeless
Even if we sentence spammers to death, SPAM will continue. We need a better system to maintain trusted e-mail servers which get feedback and lock out accounts responsible for outgoing SPAM. Mail servers that don't take reasonable steps to block outgoing SPAM should just be ignored by the whole internet community.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Beta, 16 Jul 2008 @ 3:54pm
  
  Re: Punishment is hopeless
  We need a better system to maintain trusted e-mail servers which get feedback and lock out accounts responsible for outgoing SPAM.
  
  This solution has problems. A spammer can gin up new accounts easily (if they're free-- otherwise there are many other problems). An innocent victim of a zombie virus can lose email access. A hacker can send phony feedback and get innocents kicked off the servers.
  
  I've been thinking about two other approaches. One involves digital cash, which nobody seems interested in implementing, the other involves digital tags I call passports: I make up a few of these and distribute them to my friends, who attach them to any mail they send to me. My email robot destroys any incoming message that doesn't have a passport. I can include a passport with a post in a public forum (like this one) which any reader can use to contact me, or with my letter to a stranger, or whatever. If I receive spam, I simply strike that passport from my robot's list (and maybe chide the person to whom I entrusted it, and maybe distribute a new one). All of this can be done by hand, or managed invisibly by email software. The important thing is that it doesn't require ridding the world of spam.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jul 2008 @ 3:01pm

How about locking the spammer in a room for 2 weeks while a constant line of people files past the door screaming about fantastic new penile enhancement products. Constantly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrew, 16 Jul 2008 @ 3:29pm

Leave him to me. I get it done! :)
Cut off their finger tips. then add salt and lemon drops to the flesh. make him scream. repeat daily by using sanding paper on the wounds, use salt and lemon drops..

rinse and repeat.

cruel. very curel indeed but should be effective. send the video to the other spammers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dimitri, 20 Jul 2008 @ 7:02pm

blowing ego
How about blowing up a driven force of a “bad” guys ego? Just expose they delusions. Does anybody met a happy dickhead (businessman or politician) no matter how reach he is? Who admires or respects reach morons selling a crap? Nobody. They family, friends (if any) ether cowardly envy or hate him and do rob or wish to rob him. Everybody just pretending respect him to get peace of pie. And he buys this?! What is the point of make of buck out of bullshit? To buy good bullshit and get f-ed till the end of the life? To be famous moron?! They must be brain damaged to believe in its own bullshit. What an honor for a human.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]