On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Matthew Cline wrote: > > "It is interesting that this spam attack appears to be originating > > from a distributed set of zombie cable/DSL modems that someone > > likely took over in a past virus attack. > If the spammers are using zombies, then couldn't both the spammers and the > site being advertised tell the court it was a joe-job? In a situation like > this, how do you gather enough evidence to make it stick in court?
If these businesses want to write off their cost of the spam 'advertising' as an expense, they have it recorded *somehow*. I believe this would be a case where the business records of the advertised sites would be subpoenaed (sp?) and build a chain of circumstantial evidence, linking the 'suspected' spammer together with the known advertised site, with payments recorded in the suitable time-frame. It's not 'easy', but I'm sure Habeas has taken all of this into consideration. Mind you, I strongly suspect that the spammers will have set up a 'dummy' subsidiary corporation to test out this idea. So even if Habeas 'wins', they may find themselves awarded damages from a company that simply goes bankrupt on paper, doing very little damage to the parent spammer company. Then it will come down to a test of the laws that hold directors and parent companies responsible for corportate 'misdoings'...... It is going to be interesting to watch how this turns out. - Charles ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software. Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms. Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
