I wish these folks the best of luck.
One of the best software apps for filtering crap from the Internet is an old analog one, called "the Law."
.................................
Geeky Legal Beagles Nail Spammers
from Wired News
Story location:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,58939,00.html
May. 26, 2003 PT
A battalion of lawyer geeks is taking on spam, spyware, security screw-ups, incomprehensible software licenses, useless privacy policies and many other ills plaguing computer users. The charge is being led by New York state's Attorney General Eliot Spitzer.
Spitzer and the lawyers that staff the attorney general's Internet bureau think crime isn't any less prosecutable just because it happens online.
They're fighting spammers by charging them with fraud and slapping down companies that don't live up to their privacy policies. They're also contesting the validity of the lengthy, legalese-packed software licenses that users have to click OK and agree to before applications will install.
Spitzer and crew even think that bad website security is a crime punishable by law.
"Elliot Spitzer is constantly educating himself on new technology," said Edward Hayes, a Manhattan lawyer who worked with Spitzer on a case about the disbursement of funds for victims of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. "And he uses what he learns to take quick action against any schemes intended to rip off the public."
Spitzer, named Crusader of the Year and dubbed "the people's champion" by Time magazine in 2002, announced Tuesday that he is considering a run for New York governor in 2006. He is known for using old laws in interesting new ways to fight for consumers' rights.
The four lawyers assigned to the New York attorney general's Internet beat identify themselves as "nerds -- by nature or necessity," according to Kenneth Dreifach, chief of Spitzer's Internet bureau.
"We're dealing with laws that are, in some cases, hundreds of years old, Dreifach said. "If you don't really understand technology, you can end up applying the law in ways that are unrealistic or technologically unfeasible. But if you understand both technology and law you also see that there are plenty of perfectly good laws that can and should be used to stop Internet crimes."
Spitzer's office recently charged a New York resident, Howard Carmack, with four felony and two misdemeanor counts of fraud for sending millions of e-mails that utilized spamming software, touting herbal Viagra and get-rich-quick schemes.
The charges were for fraud because the spam was sent from bogus Internet accounts that Carmack allegedly opened using stolen identities.
Carmack, better known as the Buffalo Spammer, was charged with identity theft and two counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, a misdemeanor fraud, for allegedly forging the headers of e-mail sent from Earthlink accounts.
The software program he allegedly used to send spam netted him a charge of criminal possession of a forgery device. If convicted, Carmack faces a maximum of seven years in prison.
"Prosecutions like this are designed to teach spammers that cybercrime does not pay," Spitzer said.
Carmack isn't the first spewer of spam that has felt the wrath of Spitzer.
In January, MonsterHut and its executives were barred from spamming after Spitzer brought them to court, based on complaints from hundreds of thousands of computer users who were informed that they had "opted in" to receive commercial e-mail from MonsterHut.
The consumers vehemently disagreed.
Spitzer's not-so-secret weapon in the spam war is Assistant Attorney General Stephen Kline.
Kline, who is handling the Buffalo Spammer case and handled MonsterHut, came to Spitzer from the Manhattan district attorney's office.
"Handling tech-related cases is refreshing," Kline said. "It's much more of an intellectual challenge to track and prosecute a spammer or a spyware distributor than figure out why a crack addict bashed another addict over the head with a baseball bat."
The Internet bureau also focuses on privacy issues and other consumer concerns. Of particular interest to Kline and Dreifach right now are EULAs -- end-user license agreements -- the legalese-packed documents that pop up on computer screens as software is being installed.
Among other things, some EULAs grant permission for software companies to collect confidential data from users. Others ban any critical reviews of the product sans permission.
Early this year, Spitzer won a case against software developer and retailer Network Associates. The company's EULA included a clause prohibiting users from publishing product reviews or benchmark tests without the company's permission.
Dreifach saw it as a free speech issue. "Now we're seriously looking at other EULAs that have a chilling effect on free speech, or that attempt to restrict consumers' rights," he said. Individuals can use the attorney general's online complaint form to report particularly egregious EULAs.
Spitzer also is fighting against the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act, or UCITA, a proposed law that is intended to unify the rules governing software transactions.
But UCITA, as currently drafted, would make EULAs legally binding contracts. Some say UCITA will undermine consumer and privacy protections.
"It makes no sense to me when the software industry assures me that a consumer who purchases software is actually 'licensing' it," said Dreifach. "Purchasing software should be the same as purchasing any other consumer goods -- you buy it, you own it."
Security is another issue the Internet bureau is following. Recent cases handled by the bureau set precedents for prosecuting website security snafus.
Last August, tech-magazine publisher Ziff Davis Media was hauled into court to explain why consumers' personal information was exposed on the company's website. Ziff Davis eventually was required to pay $500 to each of the 50 U.S. consumers whose private information was exposed on the company's site.
"We put up with a lot online that we'd never put up with offline," said Dreifach. "There's no reason not to hold Internet-based businesses, and Internet criminals, to the same legal standards we apply elsewhere."
...................
I'm hoping no one feels like spammers and their ilk have a "right" to clog up the Net and our inboxes...