from CBS Market Watch
EarthLink, Microsoft, Time Warner's America Online and Yahoo announced the combined filing of six lawsuits against hundreds of defendants who have been charged in violation of the laws under the federal anti-spam law, the Controlling the Assault of Non-solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003, also known as CAN-SPAM.Also, from Yahoo! Business Wire:[...]
The defendants are being charged with sending millions of bulk spam e-mail messages to customers while concealing the origins of their e-mail. The common allegations are that the bulk mailers use deceptive solicitations for products that include get-rich schemes, prescription drugs or pornography. Other charges include sending spam through third-party computers to disguise the point of origin, falsifying the origin of the e-mail or failing to include a physical address in the e-mail.
[...]Each of the four companies last night filed legal complaints in federal courts in California, Georgia, Virginia and Washington state. The complaints charge the defendants with sending a combined total of hundreds of millions of bulk spam e-mail messages to customers of the four networks. Some of the common allegations described in the complaints include these:
* Deceptive solicitations for a variety of products including get-rich-quick schemes, prescription drugs, pornography, instructions for conducting spam campaigns, banned CDs, mortgage loans, university diplomas, cable descramblers and other common types of unsolicited e-mail
* Use of open proxies (sending spam through third-party computers to disguise their point of origin)
* Falsified "from" e-mail addresses (spoofing)
* Absence of a physical address in the e-mail
* Absence of an electronic unsubscribe optionEach allegation is a direct violation of the CAN-SPAM law. A summary of each filing is included below. More detailed information about each case can be found on each complainant's Web site.
[...]
America Online
AOL v. Davis Wolfgang Hawke, et al.
Davis Wolfgang Hawke (also known as Dave Bridger), Braden Bournival and unknown John Doe Defendant co-conspirators are alleged to have transmitted millions of spam email messages directing AOL Members to websites selling "Pinacle" penis enlargement pills, weight loss supplements, hand-held devices advertised as "personal lie detectors," and a product labeled "the Banned CD." These spam messages were transmitted between July 1, 2003 and the present. The complaint alleges that AOL has tallied at least 100,000 member complaints about messages advertising these products. In addition, the complaint alleges that Hawke also offered to provide or sell a number of illegal spam-related goods and services under the apparently fictitious name "Dave Bridger," including:
* Providing "250 free proxies every day to (Hawke's) affiliates" and offering to "pay them $20 per sale for Pinacle, an herbal penis enlarger"
* Offering "bulk friendly hosting" on servers located in China, Latin America, or other foreign countries, so that mailers could "point your domains to our server if it helps you get into specific domains like AOL"
* Selling millions of AOL addresses, and "cracked" bulk mailer programsAOL v. John Does 1-40
AOL's Complaints alleges: From at least November 2003 to the present, unknown John Doe Defendants have transmitted millions of spam messages to AOL Members advertising numerous websites selling a variety of products, including mortgage leads, adult-content websites and business opportunities. The messages are transmitted through fraudulent means to make it difficult to determine the identity of those responsible, and contain misleading subject lines, including the completely false claim in some that the spam message is an "important message from AOL." The John Doe Defendants also used other deceptive tactics in an attempt to evade AOL's spam filters, including random text in the body of their messages. AOL has already tied more than half a million Member complaints to these Defendants (and is still counting complaints attributable to them). On some days, complaints about these spammers constituted as many as 10% of all AOL Member complaints about spam.
EarthLink
EarthLink v. John Does 1-25 (The "Prescription Drug Spammers"); John Does 26-35 (The "Mortgage Lead Spammers"); John Does 36-45 (The "Cable Descrambler Spammers"); John Does 46-55 (The "University Diploma Spammers"); and John Does 56-65 (The "Get Rich Quick Spammers") and John Does 66 - 75, other spammers.
Since January 1, John Doe defendants 1 - 75 have been responsible for a substantial portion of the incoming spam on EarthLink's network, sending millions of spam emails to advertise Websites selling prescription drugs, mortgage leads, cable descramblers, university diplomas and get-rich-quick schemes. The defendants have hidden their identities with false domain-name registration information, falsified headers, fake "from" lines and misleading subject lines, violating the federal CAN SPAM Act, EarthLink's Acceptable Use Policy and other state and federal laws. Some of the defendants have used text randomizers to insert long passages of gibberish in messages in attempts to evade EarthLink's spam filters.
Fingerprint phrases and sample subject lines include: "Enjoy deep discount meds here," "G_eneric via-gra 60% cheap*r cowslip," "promote someone else's online business and cash in big," "make over $1000 per day," and "attention single mothers."
Microsoft
MICROSOFT CORPORATION v. JDO MEDIA, INC., a Florida Corporation, and JOHN DOES 1-50 (United States District Court, Western District of Washington)
This lawsuit charges JDO Media, Inc. ("JDO"), a Florida company, and other unknown defendants, with operating an automated multi-level marketing ("MLM") program that is advertised through spam, and that instructs its members on how to generate leads for the program, or for other products, through spam. The lawsuit alleges that Hotmail subscribers have been barraged by millions of illegal emails touting this program.
The lawsuit alleges that the spam used to promote the program is intentionally routed through open proxies, contains header information that is false and misleading, and uses other obfuscatory methods to disguise the senders' identities. This lawsuit also charges that the email advertising the program contains misleading subject lines such as "This is your lucky day", "Elite, Professional Invitation", and "Warning!!! These three minutes could change your life". Many of these email messages are sent with "high priority." These deficiencies are all alleged to be in violation of the federal CAN-SPAM Act.
Alleged CAN-SPAM Violations
-- falsified from email addresses and transmission paths
-- use of open proxies
-- deceptive subject lines
-- no physical address on some of the messagesMICROSOFT CORPORATION v. JOHN DOES 1-50, d/b/a Super Viagra Group (United States District Court, Western District of Washington)
This lawsuit alleges that the Super Viagra Group has sent hundreds of millions of illegal e-mail messages to Hotmail subscribers advertising either "Super Viagra" or a weight loss patch. The e-mailing practices of this spam group are sophisticated, and are alleged to be in violation of the federal CAN-SPAM Act and other state and federal law.
The lawsuit contends that the Super Viagra Group routes its e-mail messages through open proxies and hijacked computers in countries around the world, uses misleading transmission information and subject lines, and take other actions to disguise their true identities. The lawsuit identifies almost forty different domain names where, allegedly, the Super Viagra Group's products can be purchased. The identified domains are registered to individuals in Argentina, Turkey, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Lithuania, and India.
Alleged CAN-SPAM Violations
-- open proxies for some or all emails
-- falsified from email addresses on most or all emails
-- deceptive subject lines on some emails
-- no physical address on most emails
-- no electronic unsubscribe option on some emailsYahoo! Inc.
Yahoo! Inc. vs. Eric Head, Matthew Head and Barry Head, and their companies Gold Disk Canada, Inc., Head Programming, Inc., and Infinite Technologies Worldwide, Inc. collectively known as "The Head Operation."
Alleged Spam Activity:
Defendants were on Yahoo! Mail's "Most Wanted" spammer list for allegedly sending millions of spam messages. In January 2004, Yahoo! Mail received approximately 94 million total e-mails from The Head Operation.
* Disguised Identity: The use of open proxies from countries all over the world to disguise the origin of the messages.
* Unsolicited Commercial Messages: Messages consisted of solicitations for life insurance, mortgage and debt consolidation and travel services.
* Deceptive Subject lines: Messages included misleading subject lines, including "past due account."
* Sold Personal Data: Defendants allegedly collected personal information, such as the names and e-mail addresses of Yahoo! Mail users who responded to the defendants' spam solicitations, and sold the information as "leads" to marketers.
* False Domains: The domain names for the websites promoted in the messages were falsely registered to individuals with physical addresses in China.
* Font Tricks: The defendants used color font tricks to hide randomized text in an attempt to circumvent the SpamGuard filter.
from MSNBC
In a dramatic break with President Bush, a prominent group of gay Republicans that supported him four years ago is launching a $1 million advertising campaign today attacking the administration for trying to ban same-sex marriage.The ad, by the Log Cabin Republicans, uses grainy footage of Vice President Cheney saying during the 2000 campaign that the matter should be left to the states.
Bush's decision to endorse a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage was "the line in the sand" for the 27-year-old group, which has never run a campaign ad, said Executive Director Patrick Guerriero. He said he had warned the White House as Bush edged toward supporting an amendment that "despite our historic loyalty to the party and the president, we would be forced to speak out if gay and lesbian families were going to be used as wedge issues in swing states."
[...]
Link via Boing Boing
from The EFF:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) joined five library associations, Public Knowledge, the Consumer Federation of America, and the Consumers Union in suing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) last week to block overbroad regulation of next-generation televisions and related devices."The FCC's digital broadcast television mandate is a step in the wrong direction because it would make digital television cost more and do less, undermining innovation, fair use, and competition," said EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann, "The FCC overstepped its bounds, unduly restricting consumers and manufacturers when it issued its broadcast flag ruling."
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled on November 4, 2003, that consumer devices capable of receiving broadcast digital television (DTV) signals must implement content control technologies demanded by the entertainment industry to restrict consumer uses of digital television. Left unchallenged, the "broadcast flag" mandate would go into effect by July 1, 2005.
The lawsuit, called ALA v. FCC, was filed in the Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., and charges that the FCC exceeded its jurisdiction, acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner, and failed to point to substantial evidence in adopting a broadcast flag mandate.
The FCC has asked the court to put the lawsuit on hold, pending the FCC's decision on petitions to reconsider the broadcast flag mandate, although all of the petitions address unrelated matters. The coalition of organizations opposed in court the FCC's attempt to postpone the lawsuit.