Re: Spammers ordered to pay $1 billion

[Greg Boehnlein <damin () nacs net>]

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Gadi Evron wrote:

> Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> > http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/18/spam.lawsuit.ap/index.html
> >
> > What a nice present for the holiday season :-)
> >
> > -Hank
>
> Indeed! If it will hold after the appeal.
> Thing is, the spammers are not there to be found for paying, so they 
> might not exist for appealing. Meaning this might become a real legal 
> precedence.. so maybe there will even be a second.

While it is a victory in the Legal sense, it doesn't actually have any 
consequence to the spammers:

"Kramer's attorney, Kelly Wallace, said he is unlikely to ever collect the 
judgment, which was made possible by an Iowa law that allows plaintiffs to 
claim damages of $10 per spam message. The judgments were then tripled 
under RICO.

"We hope to recover at least his costs," Wallace said."

-- 
    Vice President of N2Net, a New Age Consulting Service, Inc. Company
         http://www.n2net.net Where everything clicks into place!
                             KP-216-121-ST