Proud, Bragging Spammer Alan Ralsky Pleads Guilty

from the about-time dept

Wed, Jun 24th 2009 5:20pm — Mike Masnick

Remember Alan Ralsky? He was the super proud spammer that way back in 2002 gave a defiant and proud interview with his hometown paper, the Detroit Free Press, where he showed off his home and other expensive purchases, all paid for with spam -- which he insisted was "the greatest business model in the world." So what happened? Well, the folks at Slashdot used the info in the article to figure out where he lived and started signing him up for a ton of snail mail marketing offers, overwhelming his actual mailbox. Rather than recognizing the irony, Ralsky flipped out. Apparently, it's only the greatest business model in the world when you're not on the receiving end.

It definitely took a while, but the law finally caught up to Ralsky, and he learned that "the greatest business model in the world" is actually called fraud -- and it can put you in jail. The FBI started investigating Ralsky in 2005, but he wasn't actually indicted until 2008. And, the latest news is that he's agreed to plead guilty and could face both jailtime and fines for wire fraud, money laundering and violations of the CAN SPAM Act (wow, it does sometimes work!). Of course, since Ralsky's time, spammers have gone underground and overseas. The era of the great proud American spammer who courted the press seems to be over.

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: alan ralsky, fraud, spam

17 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2009 @ 6:28pm

Actually, stuff like this is proof that the rule of law actually works, and can change people's perceptions about things.

10-15 years ago, spam was it. Everyone spammed. Every company, every individual, every fool. People would get AOL accounts just to go in and get lists of names to spam. It was hilarious - and evil.

The only spam you get now comes from botnets and offshore accounts, and they tend not to last long, they are involved in an insanely fast paced game of whack-a-mole.

The funny part? It looks like file traders / torrents will end up in the same few countries that still harbor spammers. What a nice collection of undesirables all in the same places.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2009 @ 8:36pm
  
  Re:
  I'm not sure how you can compare spam and p2p. They're completely different.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2009 @ 8:50pm
    
    Re: Re:
    They have one thing in common: The purveyors are all trying to hide out in the same countries with the same lax laws. Basically, spam was "okay" a long time ago, it is no longer okay, and the people left doing it are having to use extraordinary means to do it. It's sort of like the whole napster to torrent thing. A whole bunch of technology just to try to dance around the laws and make the players harder to identify.
    
    In the end, it's done like the for a reason, and it isn't about just being sneaky!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2009 @ 4:51am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Still not following. You're comparing fraud, which is illegal, with file sharing, which is not illegal. Only some of the content that is being shared is illegal, and that is not the fault or responsibility of the tool, p2p. It's fun watching these strawmen burn.
      
      And, by the way, it takes an enormous troll to take a post pointing out a bit of good news and turn it around into a totally unrelated topic just so they can whine about something.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2009 @ 6:04am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Actually, check again. spam isn't always fraud (there is often a product to be purchases at the end), but that the sending of spam has become less and less tolerated over time (legally and socially). Effectively, there is almost no way to legally spam in the US anymore, and most of the western world in one form or another.
        
        File sharing? Hmm. Open a torrent site in the US filled with "infringing" material, and see exactly how long you last. You will be buried under so much paper it will take you a week just to see the sun again.
        
        So what happens? File sharing and spam end up in the few remaining places that don't show respect for others rights. Spam is a violation of my personal space, file trading is a violation of copyright laws in most every country. So the birds of a feather flock together, hiding in offshore spaces and hoping nobody knocks them off.
        
        Serious, after TPB loses and has to move out of thier current location, where do you think they will go? I suspect hosting in China or maybe North Korea.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2009 @ 5:15pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It's sort of like the whole napster to torrent thing. A whole bunch of technology just to try to dance around the laws and make the players harder to identify.
      
      A statement like that reflects a great ignorance about the two and the technical differences between them. A willingness to makes such statements in public while knowing so little about the subject shows even greater ignorance.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2009 @ 12:20pm
  
  Re:
  "10-15 years ago, spam was it. Everyone spammed. Every company, every individual, every fool."
  
  Um, what the FUCK are you talking about?
  
  "He was proud of pure and utter failure? Because I've never, ever, EVER seen any spam that could get me to look based on the email address and title.
  
  He was totally and undeniably incompetent at what he bragged about, and if anyone with his same resources to be "the spam king" would have done a better job getting spam through filters and people to actually look at it. Even a monkey could have bone better."
  
  Ummmm... obviously he was not an utter failure. SPAM relies on small percentages of complete morons who wind up falling for the bullshit. That's why they send out millions (billions?) of emails to get the small percentage.
  
  And a gigantic fucking LOL at that dumbass. Got what he deserved. I say again: LOL
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
trilobug, 24 Jun 2009 @ 6:41pm

[@ AC}]

Hey, Australia wasn't built in a day. :p
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2009 @ 6:52pm
  
  Re:
  tee-hee It took a while! :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2009 @ 7:38pm
  
  Re:
  Dont forget Canada, otherwise they might start demanding some of that Internet Money
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2009 @ 7:55pm

So basically
He was proud of pure and utter failure? Because I've never, ever, EVER seen any spam that could get me to look based on the email address and title.

He was totally and undeniably incompetent at what he bragged about, and if anyone with his same resources to be "the spam king" would have done a better job getting spam through filters and people to actually look at it. Even a monkey could have bone better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- lamer, 15 Aug 2012 @ 2:44pm
  
  Re: So basically
  Look at my name, that is what you are
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lonzo5, 24 Jun 2009 @ 9:28pm

Spam/Junk Mail
Hey,

I can kinda understand spam and junk e-mail, but why are unsolicited circular ads and retarded credit offers at all legal? The amount of paper/energy wasted in this manner must be astronomical. Not thinking very green, if you ask me. And the fact that my address is being bought and sold between companies with which I've had no contact? A shady business model to say the least. There should be an all-inclusive "do-not-mail list," similar to what they've enacted for telemarketers. I have signed up for one of those mail preference services, but I still feel you should be able to opt out completely. It's a waste of paper and space. I'm glad that guy's getting his, though-- spam is the absolute bane of modern civilization.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2009 @ 12:23am
  
  Re: Spam/Junk Mail
  On this topic... I have AT&T home DSL service, but I do not pay for their uVerse TV service. Because they assume that I must have TV therefore must be paying for cable, I am receiving MASSIVE mailers at least twice a week about the service. Seriously, one of them was a 30 page full color firm cover MAGAZINE, and all it really said was 'we offer TV'.
  
  I'm disgusted by the cost and waste of marketing this service to me based on one premise, that I must be getting TV from someone. I'm not, and have never had any TV at this address.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Glenn, 25 Jun 2009 @ 6:40am

Money laundering, wire fraud, etc.
It's the other stuff that got him in trouble. "Spam" is still legal. As far as spamming goes, it's not what you do, it's how you do it. As far as CAN SPAM goes, if you follow the simple rules it lays out, then you "can spam" all you want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2009 @ 5:19pm
  
  Re: Money laundering, wire fraud, etc.
  As far as CAN SPAM goes, if you follow the simple rules it lays out, then you "can spam" all you want.
  
  Yep. He just wasn't doing it right.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2009 @ 7:52pm
    
    Re: Re: Money laundering, wire fraud, etc.
    Actually, Can-Spam pretty much makes it impossible to spam.
    
    You can have direct email contact with past and present customers or opted in customers, or you can email anyone exactly once. You cannot build a spam business by mailing people once.
    
    Spam requires a truly unrelenting torrent of mail, millions of emails every hour of every day, repeating to the same addresses over and over again. The returns are small, but functional - but that type of mailing is no longer legal in the US.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]