Sanford Wallace Loses Again; Owes Facebook $711 Million
from the good-luck-collecting dept
Sanford "Spamford" Wallace, of course, was the original "spam king" back in the 1990s. Despite his claim to have reformed at one point, he apparently has been spamming various social networks and advertising spyware. Back in 2004, the FTC investigated him and fined him $4 million. Last year, MySpace won a $234 million judgment against him. Wallace responded by disappearing. At one point, even his lawyer couldn't find him. Earlier this year, when Facebook sued him for spamming their users as well, it seemed unlikely that he would bother to respond. Surprising pretty much everyone, he showed up in court, though claimed he was totally bankrupt. Either way, Facebook has just been awarded a $711 million judgment against him. Facebook, of course, will never see a dime of that money. But, the real question is what else can be done to stop Wallace. He's been spamming for well over a decade at this point, and despite multiple multi-million dollar judgments against him, he hasn't stopped. What else can be done?
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: sanford wallace, spam, spamford
Companies: facebook
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Which illustrates a fundamental point...
There's really no difference, other than strategy and tactics, between Spamford or anyone else who's in the abuse business. Whether it's spam or phishing or spyware or any of the other myriad interconnected "enterprises" out there, the profits are high, the risks are low, and no government entity on this planet has yet shown itself to be equipped with the clue and the motivation to take any effective action.
So the best that can be done is to protect oneself and one's networks/systems/users, on the presumption that these bad actors will never stop -- they'll only change their approach from time to time, as old methods stop working and new ones emerge. On the other hand, there's precisely zero reason to waste time on legislative/judicial approaches, since all of these to date have been total failures.
As we see again, in this case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A helpful suggestion from Lord Helmet
Well, I like a bit of irony in my vindictive retribution, so here's a thought:
First, upon capture, you lock wallace into a pen, strip him down, and chain his hands and feet. Then you literally cover his body from top to bottom in animal shortening, to make him sticky. Working a deal out with Hormel, you then allow any member of the public who wishes to sign a small piece of Spam, maybe with a message to Wallace on it, and slap it on his sticky body, making sure it stays there. At the end of several days of this treatment, he will be literally covered head to toe in Hormel brand spam.
On day five you take several pictures of him and post them all over the place. As Wallace shouts at you and demands to know when this humiliation will cease, you smile and tell him that it's over. He's made it through.
Inevitably he'll demand that you get the spam off of him. That's when you smile, nod, and release the 37 starving pigs you have in the next pen. They'll go through the spam, animal shortening, and Wallace's body matter in mere minutes, Snatch style.
Or, hey, maybe you just throw his ass in jail, your call...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A helpful suggestion from Lord Helmet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A helpful suggestion from Lord Helmet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heck, look at TPB. With careful weaseling of fact, fiction, and that grey area in the middle, they have lead the industry types and the courts around in circles for a long time. It's very sad, and another indication of the era we live in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
3 strikes and your out?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I find that interesting, because it's precisely the same reasoning that I've used to argue that spamming should be a capital offense. If you do some simple math on a medium-size spam run, say, half a billion messages, adjust for those that get blocked, and then pick a sensible number for the time it takes a person to deal with those messages (lets say, 5 seconds), it quickly becomes obvious that individual spammers are stealing time by the lifetime -- and of course it's the most precious commodity we've got, because without it, we have nothing else.
Now multiply by the organized gangs of spammers out there, especially the spammers-for-hire, and the total really escalates.
Nothing will be done about this -- except that all the ISPs, mail hosts, web hosts, etc., who cheerfully host all these spammers (for profit) will continue to sell anti-spam services to the victims (for profit) and those who attempt to hold them accountable for this will be marginalized.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So ship him to Russia.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
godfather
"who's being naive, Kay? If history has taught us
anything is that anyone can be _ _ _ _ _ _ ."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Make spam a federal offense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
After all it is the advertisers that a encouraging his illegal spamming actives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vigilantes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vigilantes?
And such a solution could be affected at almost no cost, entirely thru volunteers--rather than the the Government spending several million dollars to feed him cake and sandwiches in jail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vigilantes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spammer Punishment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Spammer Punishment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
???
I just dont see how it is profitable... I just really dont. Only money in spam that I can see is from companies that offer up "protection" from spam.... Like antivirus companies... I wonder, call me crazy but, could these companies be behind the problem? Cause all the spam then offer a way to eliminate it? Or maybe I have been reading too many Dark Helmet posts... lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ???
But you're on the right track questioning the money. There would be no point in spamming if people didn't fall for it. The problem is, people fall for it. Not a lot, but enough.
The best way to deal with spammers is educating their targets. If no one clicked on spam links, the spammers wouldn't make money and they would stop.
As for Spamford, he needs his access to electronic devices taken away. If he is found to be using them, then it's a violation of a court order and that would fit with jail time. (Note how I didn't say for how long).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ???
I'm flattered, guys, but actually with malware I don't really see any vast conspiracy by the AV/AS or security vendors to produce malware. The reason for that is I work pretty closely with a company that makes network security appliances, Spam filter included, and they actually build a large part of their blacklists through the open source community. That indicates that this stuff is out there and that enough people are looking at it in some detail that you'd expect flags to be raised if anything hinky was going on.
That, plus situations like with Spamford where you can actually put a name to a face with who's doing this shit. My mind has no trouble extrapolating Spamford to hundereds of others like him located in belligerant countries trying to do us harm.
But I think it's silly for anyone to think that a company like Symantec would actually want to completely solve the virus issue once and for all. As i there was some type of skeleton key software code that just blocked everything bad with no false positives...Symantec would do everything in their power to hide that code....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ???
If not, then of course you won't see how it's profitable.
There's a fortune to be made with spam and spyware and SEO and related forms of abuse. That's why so many people are doing it -- most of them poorly, but there are some that are quite good at it and make worthy adversaries. And thanks to their careful planning and execution, they now have the resources to employ some of the sharpest minds available -- writing code, finding holes in defenses, inventing new forms of abuse, etc. They're not all bumblers like Spamford.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look at the size of those judgments also. They're Jammie Thomas sized. Can any of the injured parties actually demonstrate that he has caused $711 million in damages? Hopefully such a ridiculous judgment will demonstrate to people how out-of-control the law is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The answer is simple...
The rest will sort itself out... I keep saying that once spammers start showing up with bullets in their head, there will be fewer spammers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Idea from earlier.
Just saying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just shoot the bastard
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pop...pop.
that's it. 75 cents and a second of time..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Say Thanks?
I dunno, commend him for his part in battle-hardening this sissy internet of ours?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A solution has already been published
Rather contrived and a sysadmin's wet dream, but what the what. It was fiction. And it's probably not going to win any awards. But it might become a TV mini-series. If an example is made of Mr. Wallace by extraditing him to Russia or incarcerating him for 40 years and we go after the advertisers who use spam maybe people will get the idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Three stikes rule
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spammer Stopped
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
great comments
I will never give out any information that I don't want the world to see.
I expect the email I use for this comment to be defunct within a year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spamford Wallace owes Facebook $711 Million
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@ Chucklebutte
I think it should be blamed on the company that made the software so lame to begin with that it needed to have antivirus protection, etc.
In other words, another operating system should take care of most of the problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
crowdsourced punishment
Put him in a chamber without a window bed or toilet. Place a locked down terminal in the wall behind some bulletproof glass. Have it display nothing but spam messages. Put some speakers behind metal grills to read the spam to him. Feed him only Spam, bread and water. Force him to consume all those pills his spam advertises as often and as much as a doctor deems reasonably safe. Any side effects that don’t result in death are considered reasonably safe. Continue this until his mind is broken.
Televise the entire affair. Subtitle it in various languages. Distribute it online.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Million Here, A Million There...
Ron D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this guys are rich
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just when you thought Christian Audigier had reached the pinnacle of edginess and success with Ed Hardy and his signature line, Christian Audigier, think again. The Godfather of couture casual wear has taken his passion for Rock and Roll, and teamed up with his idol, Johnny Halladay to create SMET. SMET is Johnny Halladay’s natural born name. The representative phrase “Born on the Street” was coined to pay homage to his roots. It is also a metaphor for the origin of all innovative ideas. With Johnny’s experience and artistic influence paired with Christian’s fashion mastermind, SMET has already created a niche for itself world-wide.The latest brand is best described as alternative urban street wear with a nod to classic rock style. Just as Ed Hardy is best known for the tattoo art with rhinestone detail, and Christian Audigier Signature Brand best known for the eccentric designs and gold couture embellishments; SMET has a personality all its own. The use of flocking and foiling on the vintage-inspired t-shirts pairs well with a leather jacket and chrome jewelry. In addition, the studding and two-toned detail on the SMET hoodies and vinyl wear completes an outfit of tapered jeans and biker boots. It doesn’t matter if you are planning a night out at Los Angeles’ famed rock bar, The Whiskey, or a weekend trip to Vegas, pieces from this clothing line can be mixed and matched with almost anything fashionable in the genre of rock, goth, and sheer individualism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
put him to use!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. someone sues him directly for harassment....defiance of a court order = prison
2. give him 1 days prison for every spam mail sent..thats a couple of million days at least (without even trying)....
3. house arrest with no pc or telephone etc for maybe 10-15years for "industrial espionage/sabotage"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]