identity theft != spam

• Previous message (by thread): identity theft != spam
• Next message (by thread): identity theft != spam
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 15 May 2003, Chris Woodfield wrote:

> The flip side is the realization that professional spamming is lucrative
> enough that at least for one person, it was worth the risk of breaking
> the law in order to keep it up.

Don't know about that, he couldn't make the $20K bail...

Charles

> -C
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 07:14:19PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
> >
> > this exemplifies the corporate and legislative attempt to confuse
> > spam == uce with forgery.  if they can make the latter the issue,
> > this leaves the way completely clear for unsolicited commercial
> > email from the corporate sector which now fills our post boxes with
> > ground trees.
> >
> > randy
> >
>

• Previous message (by thread): identity theft != spam
• Next message (by thread): identity theft != spam
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]