home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- Computer underground Digest Fri May 31, 1997 Volume 9 : Issue 41
- ISSN 1004-042X
-
- Editor: Jim Thomas (cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu)
- News Editor: Gordon Meyer (gmeyer@sun.soci.niu.edu)
- Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
- Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish
- Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
- Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
- Ian Dickinson
- Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith
- Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest
-
- CONTENTS, #9.41 (Fri, May 31, 1997)
-
- File 1--Spam-fighter Spammed (Jim Youll saga) (fwd)
- File 2--Story of E-Mail Bomb Suit
- File 3--Text of E-Mail Bomb Suit Complaint
- File 4--SF Internet Abuse Suit Filed
- File 5--AGIS says "No More Spam"?
- File 6--TEXANS SUE TO RECOVER DAMAGES FOR INTERNET "SPAM"
- File 7--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 May, 1997)
-
- CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN
- THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE.
-
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Date: Thu, 29 May 97 16:06 CDT
- From: Cu Digest <TK0JUT2@MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU>
- Subject: File 1--Spam-fighter Spammed (Jim Youll saga) (fwd)
-
- Source - TELECOM Digest Fri, 16 May 97 -- Volume 17 : Issue 121
-
- ((MODERATORS' NOTE: For those not familiar with Pat Townson's
- TELECOM DIGEST, it's a an exceptional resource. From the header
- of TcD:
- "TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but
- not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is
- circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various
- telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and
- networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also
- gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
- newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to
- qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell
- us how you qualify:
- * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * ======" ))
- ==================
-
-
- From--jim@newmediagroup.com (Jim Youll)
- Subject--We Have Been Attacked. Reward Offered. Assistance Requested.
- Date--Thu, 15 May 1997 17:59:22 -0400
-
- My domain newmediagroup.com is under attack by someone who doesn't
- like my MILITANT, PUBLIC ANTI-SPAM stance. To date their actions have
- included sending apparently several thousand e-mail messages, forged
- showing my name as the sender. In addition, this same party or someone
- working with them conducted a denial-of-service attack on our system
- last night, 5/14. Details will be posted to a website shortly,
- including system logs clearly showing the terrorists' use of
- third-party unsecured SMTP servers as relays (which you will also see
- by looking at the headers of the messages that were sent).
-
- Their attack has also included threats of harm against me.
-
- PLEASE let people know this did not originate at newmediagroup.com. It
- is a complete forgery. We are TRYING to investigate and at the moment
- have a number of backbone carriers, and MCI security, involved. I am
- doing all I can. PLEASE tell people to stop writing to complain. This
- did not come from us. We don't spam. I am FIGHTING spam and that is
- why I was targeted in this manner. When you see their mail-bomb
- messages to me, you will understand.
-
- I am seeking cooperation from the sites which were used as relays.
- Sheila, apparently an adminstrator at freenet.carleton.ca (office@ is
- their e-mail address, and if you have received junk that bounced off
- their mailer, I STRONGLY suggest you contact them and demand the holes
- be closed). Carleton Freenet has notified me (5/15/97, 1600 EDT by
- e-mail) that they will not release their SMTP logs, which would show the
- origin of the message injected into their mailer. A man reached at
- nevwest.com said he had "one technician working on it" but really didn't
- understand the specifics, and was not very excited about helping. This
- is all very exciting for electronic terrorists, I am sure.
-
- New Media Group (and I in particular!) do not send or generate
- commercial e-mail. Ever. We are a small Internet presence provider
- working closely and on-site with clients in the Midwestern
- US. Only. We do not seek, service, or advertise to anyone outside that
- area, and we do not use e-mail for advertising.
-
- Copies of all logs and the threatening messages which came here have
- been forwarded to security officers at all ISPs we could identify, and
- at the security offices of backbone providers involved in this. We're
- trying, but it will be difficult to identify who did this. We're
- trying. I fully intend to press criminal and civil charges at the
- very moment an indictment becomes feasible.
-
- The reason we have been targeted is that I (personally, not this
- company) have been leading a campaign AGAINST junk e-mail. Please help
- me find out who did this. I am prepared to file criminal and civil
- charges at the instant an indictment is feasible.
-
- If you look at the headers, you will see that the messages did not
- come from here. The incoming messages threatened more attacks unless I
- stop my campaign to free people from unwanted junk e-mail. This is
- terrorism, plain and simple and I call on the entire Internet
- community to help track down the responsible parties. I will
- appreciate any assistance you can provide.
-
- See http://www.agentzero.com/junkmail for the information I posted in
- my fight against junk e-mail. I will shortly post there complete
- system logs, messages with headers, and everything else that has been
- sent to authorities.
-
- I am offering a reward of $1,000 for information leading to the arrest
- and conviction of the perpetrators of this crime.
-
-
- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I too have really had all I can handle
- of this and I am soliciting the assistance of any attorney who wishes
- to volunteer. Jay Ashworth has pointed out to me in recent correspondence
- that Spamford and Company are systematically ripping off names and
- email addresses from mailing lists including this one. Today alone I
- personally received a dozen pieces of spam; one of which was even
- alleged to come from this machine with forged headers, etc. This is
- not going to stop anytime soon I fear, and at this point I want to
- proceed with litigation. I want to see enforcement of the federal law
- against sending unsolicited material to facsimile devices. I want to
- stop the wholesale ripoff of names which appear in this Digest. I am
- perfectly willing and desirous of being a plaintiff (or one of several
- plantiffs as the case may be) in any legal action taken against Spamford
- Wallace, AGIS and similar outfits.
-
- The comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup is a total shambles in some places
- where it became unmoderated -- quite by accident, I am sure -- filled
- with spam like most other newsgroups. Please, admins, check to make
- sure c.d.t. is **moderated** at your site. My bots are generally good
- at recognizing forged approval lines which do not have my md5sum
- signature, however the author of that script is making some changes
- and improvements in it.
-
- The point is, I have had it. Enough is enough, and I want to see those
- idiots start getting **actually sued** and not just complained about.
- Will any attorney willing to take this on -- especially one who has a
- good rapport with the local US Attorney -- please contact me. I want
- to see an actual violation of federal law, with names on it, presented
- to a grand jury or a federal judge. Will anyone help? PAT]
-
- ==================
-
- And from TELECOM Digest Sun, 18 May 97 - Volume 17 : Issue 124
-
- From--jim@newmediagroup.com (Jim Youll)
- Subject--New Media Group Attack, Update, Clarification
- Date--Sat, 17 May 1997 20:25:09 -0400
-
-
- Hello.
-
- For those of you who follow such things, it's been an interesting
- couple of days here. I will have an update at the website
- <http://www.agentzero.com/junkmail> sometime before Monday morning,
- but no promises about exactly when.
-
- Another bombing run apparently happened overnight, and we received
- well over a thousand bounces this morning. The receiving system claims
- they were sent at around 0900 (local time in UK/ 0400 EDT) from
- ISPAM.NET. Our ISP was quite upset, but understanding, and we have
- rearranged things to shift more of the load off his systems and onto
- ours.
-
- I continue to seek assistance both in the form of information, and in
- general support from the Internet community. A major crime was
- committed and I believe those who perpetrated it must be punished. But
- I cannot do this alone. We all need to stand together against such
- terrorist intimidation tactics. And we have to do it now. As a united
- group. The press have been covering these things VERY poorly. It is
- time to educate journalists and let them know this isn't just a
- "pranksters" making merry, as one local writer here described it.
-
- A past message of mine has led to some confusion (including my own)
- about the reward offered. I will clarify that now, and I apologize for
- posting in the middle of the night after working all day to harden a
- system against attacks (while simultaneously trying to stop the same
- attacks). However ...
-
- Effective May 16, 1997 at 0:00 EDT
-
- I am offering a reward of US$2,500 for information leading directly to
- the arrest and conviction of the individual or individuals responsible
- for the inbound mailbomb attack on New Media Group servers, and for
- the outbound transmission of thousands of fraudulent messages, bearing
- my name as the sender, which began at approximately 9:20 EDT on May
- 14, 1997 and continued through at least 0400 EDT on May 17.
-
- This reward is for real, the money is out of my pocket, and any payout
- will be administered by the law firm which is representing me. There
- may be additional terms and conditions related to the payment of this
- reward. I will leave it to the attorneys to work out the fine print,
- and when I have that, I will post it to the website on which I am
- trying to keep current information:
-
- Good day, and thank you for your support.
-
- Oh yeah, support. I need all the support I can get right now. This is
- not a one-guy fight. It's sort of lonely out here.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 16:48:34 -0500
- From: Jim Thomas <jthomas@sun.soci.niu.edu>
- Subject: File 2--Story of E-Mail Bomb Suit
-
- ((MODERATORS' NOTE: The following San Francisco Chronicle
- story was found on the homepage of David S. Bloom, attorney
- for a client who sued an alleged e-mail bomber. The text of
- the complaint itself is in the next post)).
-
- The San Francisco Chronicle
-
- Lawsuit Charges Malicious `E-Mail Bombing'
-
- Stephen Schwartz, Chronicle Staff Writer
-
- A South Bay man has sued SRI International, Inc. and an
- employee of the firm, alleging that he was maliciously "e-mail
- bombed" by 25,000 one-word messages calling him an "idiot"
- that were sent from computers at the electronics facility.
-
- Paul Engel, who runs a stock- trading and investment firm,
- filed a lawsuit against SRI employee Terje Oseberg and SRI on
- December 24 in San Mateo County Superior Court.
-
- Engel claimed in the lawsuit that the messages sent on
- September 23 clogged his computer, interrupted his business
- and caused an income loss and other damages exceeding $25,000.
-
- SRI is closed for the holidays and its legal department, which
- is said to be handling Oseberg and the company's defense,
- could not be contacted for comment.
-
- Oseberg did not return calls.
-
- Engel's attorney, David Bloom, said Engel had received the
- messages in the aftermath of a "minor disagreement" between
- Engel and Oseberg.
-
- The dispute, over description of the Pentium computer chip,
- began when Engel and Oseberg exchanged comments on a stock
- bulletin board called the "Silicon Investor," said Bloom.
-
- The lawyer said Engel received the one-word messages from
- computer addresses at SRI to which Oseberg is believed to have
- access as an SRI employee.
-
- According to Bloom, the content of the message is not an
- issue.
-
- "This is not a defamation case," he said. "It (the message)
- could have said `beautiful,' or it could have said, `sorry.'
- It could have said anything."
-
- The suit alleges the messages were sent not to communicate at
- all, but to harass and punish the recipient over what began as
- a small dispute.
-
- "It would be like Siskel sending Ebert 25,000 e-mails because
- he didn't like his review of Star Trek," the attorney said.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 16:48:34 -0500
- From: Jim Thomas <jthomas@sun.soci.niu.edu>
- Subject: File 3--Text of E-Mail Bomb Suit Complaint
-
- ((MODERATORS' NOTE: Here is the text of the Paul Engel's Mail
- Bomb complaint. Paul Engel's Attorney, David Bloom, told CuD
- that he is confident that a settlement may be reached soon. The
- attorney sounds as if he could be a good resource for others
- wishing to take action against net abusers)).
-
- ==================
-
- David S. Bloom, Esq., SB # 151630
- 444 Castro St., Suite 430
- Mountain View, CA 94041
- (415) 960-3103
-
- Attorney for Plaintiff
- PAUL ENGEL
-
-
- SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
-
- IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
-
-
- PAUL ENGEL, an individual,
-
- Plaintiff,
-
- vs.
-
- SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
- a California corporation
- TERJE OSEBERG, an individual,
- and Does 1-50, inclusive,
-
- Defendants.
- _____________________________________/
-
- Case No. 399026
-
- Complaint for:
-
- 1. Intentional Interference with Prospective business Advantage;
- 2. Negligent Interference with Business Advantage;
- 3. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress;
- 4. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress; and
- 5. Negligence Supervision
-
- FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
- (Intentional Interference with Prospective Business Advantage v. all
- Defendants)
-
- Plaintiff, PAUL ENGEL, alleges, upon information and belief, the
- following:
- 1. Defendant SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC. ("SRI") is, and was at all
- relevant times, a California corporation, doing business in the State
- of California.
- 2. Defendant, TERJE OSEBERG ("Oseberg") is, and was at all relevant
- times, an individual.
- 3. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each
- of the defendants herein was, at all times relevant to this action,
- the agent or employee of the remaining defendants and was acting
- within the course and scope of that relationship. Plaintiff is further
- informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each of the
- defendants herein gave consent to, ratified, and/or authorized the
- acts alleged herein by the remaining cross defendants.
- 4. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of
- cross-defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and
- therefore sues these defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff
- will pray leave of this Court to amend this Complaint to allege their
- true names and capacities when ascertained.
- 5. Plaintiff is self-employed as a private investor. His business
- primarily involves the trading of stock and other investments using
- various services available on the internet. Plaintiff also uses e-mail
- to communicate with other stock traders, business contacts and
- friends. Plaintiff's receives internet services via an internet
- service provider ("ISP") known as "Earthlink."
- 6. On numerous occasions prior to September 23, 1996, plaintiff was
- registered at and used an internet website known as the "Silicon
- Investor," which is located at the uniform resource locator ("url"):
- "http://www.techstocks.com." Similarly, Defendant Oseberg also was
- registered at and used the Silicon Investor website. During the days
- up to and including September 23, 1996, while using the website,
- plaintiff and Defendant Oseberg had a difference of opinion regarding
- a certain company and its product. During this dispute, the parties
- posted numerous comments on the website's bulletin board regarding
- this product. In at least one of his postings, Defendant Oseberg
- referred to plaintiff as an "idiot."
- 7. On or about September 23, 1996, Defendant Oseberg, and Does 26-50,
- "e-mail bombed" the plaintiff by sending him approximately 25,000
- individual e-mail messages. The e-mails contained only the word
- "idiot." Because of the aforementioned "e-mail bombing", plaintiff's
- ability to use the internet and to conduct his daily business was
- severely limited until plaintiff removed the offending e-mails from
- his ISP's mail server. Moreover, plaintiff was unable to conduct both
- his business and personal day to day communications insofar as they
- involved the plaintiff's use of e-mail. Ultimately, the removal
- process took 2 3 days. However, because of the high volume of e-mails,
- plaintiff was unable to filter out potentially valuable messages from
- sources other than Defendant Oseberg.
- 8. The subject e-mails were sent from three different e-mail addresses
- or headers: "oseberg@Folpen.sri.com," "terjeo@Folpen.sri.com," and
- "terje@Folpen.sri.com." "Folpen.sri.com" refers to the e-mail server
- owned, operated and controlled by Defendant SRI, and Does 1-25, which
- is Defendant Oseberg's employer.
- 9. Defendant Oseberg, and Does 26-50, sent the subject e mails during
- the course and scope of his employment with Defendant SRI, and Does
- 1-25.
- 10. Defendants' actions were done intentionally and maliciously and
- with the specific intent to harass and inconvenient plaintiff and to
- prevent him from conducting his daily business operations.
- 11. As the further proximate result of the aforementioned acts,
- plaintiff was prevented from conducting his day to day business and
- suffered damages in a sum not yet ascertained but in excess of the
- minimum jurisdictional limit of this Court.
- 12. The above described actions taken by the defendants were done with
- malice and thus an award of punitive damages is justified.
- SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
- (Negligent Interference with Prospective Business Advantage v. all
- Defendants)
-
- 13. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference Paragraphs 1 to 11.
- 14. Defendants, and each of them, should have known that the
- aforementioned e-mail bombing would cause severely interfere
- plaintiff's ability to conduct his daily business operations.
- 15. As the proximate result of the aforementioned acts, plaintiff was
- prevented from conducting his day to day business and suffered damages
- in a sum not yet ascertained but in excess of the minimum
- jurisdictional limit of this Court.
- THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
- (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress v. all Defendants)
-
- 16. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference Paragraphs 1 to 10.
- 17. Defendants, and each of them, knew that the aforementioned e-mail
- bombing would cause plaintiff extreme emotional distress.
- 18. As the proximate result of the aforementioned acts, plaintiff
- suffered mental anguish and emotional distress in excess of the
- jurisdictional minimum of this Court.
- 19. The above described actions taken by the defendants were done with
- malice and thus an award of punitive damages is justified.
- FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
- (Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress v. all Defendants)
-
- 20. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference Paragraphs 1 to 10.
- 21. Defendants, and each of them, should have known that the
- aforementioned e-mail bombing would cause plaintiff extreme emotional
- distress.
- 22. As a proximate cause of the conduct of the defendants, plaintiffs
- suffered humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional distress and have
- been injured as follows.
- FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
- (Negligent Supervision v. Defendant SRI and Does 1-25)
-
- 23. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference Paragraphs 1 to 10.
- 24. Defendants SRI, and Does 1-25, negligently supervised Defendant
- Terje Oseberg, and Does 26-50.
- 25. As a proximate cause of the conduct of the defendants, plaintiffs
- suffered humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional distress and have
- been injured as follows.
- 26. As the further proximate result of the aforementioned acts,
- plaintiff was prevented from conducting his day to day business and
- suffered damages in a sum not yet ascertained.
- PRAYER FOR RELIEF
- WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against defendants, and each of
- them, as follows:
- 1. For general damages according to proof but in excess of the
- jurisdictional minimum of this Court;
- 2. For loss of income according to proof;
- 3. For punitive damages
- 4. For costs of the suit herein incurred; and
- 5. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper.
-
-
- Dated: December 24, 1996
-
-
-
-
- __________/S/______________
- DAVID SETH BLOOM
- Attorney for Plaintiff PAUL ENGEL
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 11:05:34 -0800
- From: "--Todd Lappin-->" <telstar@wired.com>
- Subject: File 4--SF Internet Abuse Suit Filed
-
- Source - fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu
-
- Curious use of the CDA here...
-
- --T-->
-
- Internet Abuse Suit Filed
-
- SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The leader of an alleged satanic cult has filed a
- suit against an Internet provider, accusing the company of allowing an
- unknown customer to post messages accusing him of child sex abuse.
-
- The case is one of the first filed in California under the new federal
- Communications Decency Act, the San Francisco Examiner reported Friday.
-
- It was filed by Michael Aquino, a retired Army lieutenant colonel who
- founded the Temple of Set in San Francisco.
-
- Aquino, who says in court documents that he was investigated but never
- charged in a mid-1980s Army investigation of alleged child sexual abuse
- at a Presidio day care center, is suing the San Diego Internet provider,
- ElectriCiti, on whose service the messages were posted.
-
- ElectriCiti contends the Communications Decency Act protects it from
- liability in such cases.
-
- Aquino says he and his wife Lilith filed suit against ElectriCiti after
- it refused to help him track down his alleged harasser. A declaration
- attached to the suit says Aquino was "a victim of false allegations in
- the Presidio day care case."
-
- Aquino charges that ElectriCiti breached its duty to him and to other
- customers by failing to cut off the anonymous user and allowing that
- person to continue posting alleged libelous material and threats against
- him and his wife.
-
- The suit asks for $100,000 in emotional distress damages and $150,000 in
- punitive damages.
-
- In court papers, the Aquinos allege that a person using the Internet
- name "Curio" posted more than 500 "defamatory messages" against them in
- various news groups and Web pages. The messages began on Dec. 2, 1996,
- and continue today, the suit says.
-
- Curio has accused the couple "of having participated in heinous crimes,
- sexual perversions and acts of moral turpitude," the lawsuit says.
-
- The messages also accuse the couple of participating in the molestations
- of dozens of children enrolled at the Presidio's child day care center
- in 1985 and 1986, the lawsuit says.
-
- Police and federal authorities searched Michael Aquino's home at the
- time, but he was never charged. A day care teacher was later charged but
- the case was dismissed.
-
- The Aquinos have had bricks thrown through the windows of their home
- "and have been the target of nastiness," ever since, said James Graeb,
- the couple's attorney. "The Aquinos want to get a restraining order to
- prevent further harassment. To do so they have to identify Curio," he
- said.
-
- After the messages appeared, the Aquinos filed a written complaint with
- ElectriCiti, Graeb said. The company initially tried to help but backed
- down after a user, suspected of being Curio, objected to being
- identified, he said.
-
- "Curio has stalked the Aquinos, made threats of physical violence
- against them, harassed them and has libeled them," Graeb said.
- "ElectriCiti has a duty to the Aquinos and the public, to act in a
- responsible manner, to investigate written complaints and ensure the
- safety of people."
-
- ElectriCiti contends that under the Communications Decency Act, passed
- by Congress in 1996, it is not responsible for content posted by a user.
- The company also says it cannot monitor messages due to the sheer volume
- of traffic on the Internet. The company also protects the privacy of
- users and does not release their names, it says.
-
- "When someone else is posting on the Internet, simply using the Internet
- service provider as a means of putting the message out there, the
- provider is much like the phone company and the message is like a phone
- call," said Roger Myers, a San Francisco attorney who represents the
- defendant and other media companies.
-
- "You can't hold the phone company responsible for a phone call you don't
- like," Myers said. "If these cases are allowed to go forward they will
- have a dramatic chilling effect on the ability of service providers to
- allow open access to the Internet."
-
- A hearing is set June 12 on Myers' motion to dismiss the case.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 17:54:44 -0400 (EDT)
- From: Thomas Grant Edwards <tedwards@Glue.umd.edu>
- Subject: File 5--AGIS says "No More Spam"?
-
- Source - fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu
-
- [from http://www.agis.net...file this under the believe it when we don't
- see more spam category...NANOG list members report AGIS outage sunday with
- AGIS claiming routers pingflooded by someone inside the AGIS network,
- however again it is difficult to believe]
-
- AGIS, IEMMC Halt Bulk E-Mail
-
- Dearborn, MI May 27th, 1997: Worldwide Internet access provider AGIS (Apex
- Global Internet Services, Inc.) has challenged all members of the Internet
- E-Mail Marketing Council (IEMMC) to stop originating all bulk e-mail
- through the AGIS network. Under the terms of this agreement, Cyber
- Promotions, Cybertize E-mail, Integrated Media Promotions, ISG, and
- Quantum Communications agreed to cease sending unsolicited commercial
- e-mail (UCE) through the AGIS network until the IEMMC delivers a working
- filtration system and acceptable use policies.
-
- AGIS, founded in 1994 and one of the original "big six" Internet
- companies, has been at the center of a recent controversy for providing
- Internet connections to corporations that send unsolicited commercial
- e-mail to Internet users. The Company said that members of the IEMMC
- agreed to suspend bulk e-mail services on Sunday, May 25th , 1997.
-
- "IEMMC's acceptance of the AGIS request attests to our commitment to
- promoting the ethical use of bulk e-mail in this emerging global
- industry," said Walt Rines, IEMMC President. "IEMMC members have ceased to
- send commercial e-mail until the solution is officially implemented." The
- IEMMC recently announced its first termination of a bulk e-mail abuser's
- account. On May 16th at 9:00 EST, an offender using a dial-up America
- On-Line account and hijacking UUNet International relays was found to be
- unloading a large quantity of unsolicited e-mail to Internet users. IEMMC
- then notified Quantum Communications, an IEMMC founding member, which
- quickly terminated the user's account.
-
- "It has been AGIS' concern that if we were to disconnect bulk e-mailers
- from our network that they would continue to abuse the Internet from
- somewhere else. Instead, by gaining their cooperation and founding an
- organization that serves as a watchdog for e-mail abuse, there exists a
- system of checks and balances which can serve as a long term solution,"
- said Cary Joshi, AGIS Director of Corporate Development. "However, until
- the system is firmly in place, we believe it is necessary to put a stop to
- all bulk e-mail emanating from customers on our network. The IEMMC has
- agreed to cooperate in this effort."
-
- Sanford Wallace, President of Cyber Promotions, said, "We welcome the
- challenge of implementing a set of rules and regulations, as well as the
- technological solutions necessary to make the bulk e-mail industry
- acceptable to Internet users. With the technological assistance of a
- company of AGIS' caliber, it has become possible to keep bulk e-mail away
- from those who are strongly opposed to it."
-
- AGIS (www.agis.net), founded in 1994, provides Internet access to millions
- of users via its extensive customer base of Regional Bell Operating
- Companies, content providers, large corporations, and Internet service
- providers. A technology leader and innovator, AGIS is the first Internet
- access provider to deploy ATM technology to operate a national backbone
- network, the first to offer commercial 155 Mbps connections to the 'Net,
- the first to reduce points of failure in a network by using switching
- technologies, the first to design a wholesale business model (so as not to
- compete with customers by selling retail access), and the first to provide
- multiple distribution centers for content replication (CooLocation (tm))
- AGIS offers Internet connectivity from 56 Kbps to 155 Kbps.
-
- AGIS is headquartered at 3601 Pelham Road, Dearborn, Michigan 48124
- Phone: 800/380-AGIS; Fax: 313-563-6119; E-mail: info@agis.net
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 20:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
- From: jonl@well.com
- Subject: File 6--TEXANS SUE TO RECOVER DAMAGES FOR INTERNET "SPAM"
-
- FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
-
- TEXANS SUE TO RECOVER DAMAGES FOR INTERNET "SPAM" CLAIMING
- ELECTRONIC TRESPASS AND NUISANCE
-
- Austin, Texas, May 28, 1997: Several Internet leaders in Austin,
- Texas filed a lawsuit yesterday afternoon against a company and an
- individual believed to be responsible for the mass distribution of
- junk mail over the Internet, also called "spam." The suit claims that
- C.N. Enterprises and Craig Nowak of San Diego, California, sent
- thousands of electronic messages selling information on "Free Cash
- Grants" for $19.95. The ad's content was not only misleading, the
- lawsuit claims, but the company's e-mail used a false return address,
- causing the electronic mail boxes of several Austin residents to
- overflow with returned copies of the junk mail.
-
- According to the lawsuit, by using a false return address, those who
- send junk mail over the Internet can avoid the anger that results from
- this controversial practice. They can also avoid dealing with the
- thousands of "bounce" messages that result from sending e-mail to
- invalid or outdated addresses. "In effect," the lawsuit alleges,
- "C.N. Enterprises deliberately dumped tons of its electronic garbage
- and pollution" into the Austin residents' mailboxes. The lawsuit
- claims that the use of false return addresses on junk e-mail, and the
- resulting fallout on those who own the addresses used, is illegal
- under the traditional common law causes of action of nuisance,
- trespass and conversion.
-
- The lead plaintiff is Tracy LaQuey Parker, a leading Internet
- author, who owns the Internet domain name used by C.N. Enterprises
- without her permission. Said Ms. Parker, "As a long-time Internet
- advocate, I am saddened that the goodwill spirit of the Internet is
- being spoiled by irresponsible individuals who forge their identity in
- order to make a quick buck. There are plenty of examples of
- legitimate commercial uses of the Internet. This isn't one of them."
-
- Joining Ms. Parker in the lawsuit are her husband Patrick Parker and
- Peter Rauch, both Ms. Parker's business partners. Also joining the
- suit are Zilker Internet Park, Ms. Parker's Internet service provider,
- which had to deal with the flood of messages stemming from the "spam,"
- and two active Texas Internet groups, the Texas Internet Service
- Providers Association (TISPA), a group of commercial Internet service
- providers, and EFF-Austin, a local Internet civil liberties
- organization.
-
- John Quarterman, an owner of Zilker Internet Park, stated, "'Spam'
- is a large and rapidly growing problem which has cost Zilker Internet
- Park and many other ISPs and Internet users much time and money. We
- have put many technical blocks in place to limit it. With this
- lawsuit, we are taking the next step to help stop this abuse of the
- Internet."
-
- TISPA and EFF-Austin joined the lawsuit in an effort to broaden the
- legal precedent beyond Ms. Parker's single Internet domain name,
- according to Gene Crick, TISPA's president. "Increasingly, 'spammers'
- are using false return addresses to avoid taking full responsibility
- for the harm caused by their unsolicited commercial e-mail," Crick
- said. "These forgeries dump huge volumes of unwanted junk mail onto
- Internet companies and their customers. TISPA would like to see the
- court grant a broad and clear injunction prohibiting this practice."
-
- The lawsuit was filed on behalf of LaQuey and the others by Pete
- Kennedy and Roger Williams of George, Donaldson & Ford, L.L.P. of
- Austin. Among its other Internet related cases, the law firm has
- been
- involved in lawsuits against the United States Secret Service and
- Simon Leis, the Hamilton County (Ohio) Sheriff, over the seizure of
- private e-mail.
-
- # # #
-
- For more information, contact:
-
- Plaintiffs:
- Tracy LaQuey Parker and Patrick Parker, 512-454-7748
- John Quarterman, Zilker Internet Park, 512-451-7620
- Gene Crick, Texas Internet Service Providers Association (TISPA),
- 512-303-1021
- Jon Lebkowsky, EFF-Austin, 512-444-5175
-
- Law Firm:
- Peter Kennedy or Roger Williams
- George, Donaldson & Ford, L.L.P., 512-495-1400
-
- Media Contact:
- Peggy Hubble or Sondra Williams, MEM/Hubble Communications,
- 512-480-8961
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Thu, 7 May 1997 22:51:01 CST
- From: CuD Moderators <cudigest@sun.soci.niu.edu>
- Subject: File 7--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 7 May, 1997)
-
- Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
- available at no cost electronically.
-
- CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest
-
- Or, to subscribe, send post with this in the "Subject:: line:
-
- SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST
- Send the message to: cu-digest-request@weber.ucsd.edu
-
- DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS.
-
- The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6436), fax (815-753-6302)
- or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
- 60115, USA.
-
- To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CU-DIGEST
- Send it to CU-DIGEST-REQUEST@WEBER.UCSD.EDU
- (NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line)
-
- Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
- news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
- LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
- libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
- the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"
- On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
- on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet);
- CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
- 1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.
-
- In ITALY: ZERO! BBS: +39-11-6507540
-
- UNITED STATES: ftp.etext.org (206.252.8.100) in /pub/CuD/CuD
- Web-accessible from: http://www.etext.org/CuD/CuD/
- ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/
- aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
- world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
- wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
- EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/CuD/CuD/ (Finland)
- ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
-
-
- The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the
- Cu Digest WWW site at:
- URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/
-
- COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
- information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
- diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long
- as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and
- they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that
- non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
- specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
- relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are
- preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts
- unless absolutely necessary.
-
- DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
- the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
- responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
- violate copyright protections.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- End of Computer Underground Digest #9.02
- ************************************
-
-
-